Islamic State Militants Mocked By US State Department In Grisly Video (WARNING, GRAPHIC)

[ltr]Islamic State militants currently sweeping across Syria and Iraq have already gained notoriety through their use of intimidating, but slick, social media campaigns.[/ltr]
[ltr]Now, the US State Department has released their own video to counter terrorist attempts to recruit people online.[/ltr]
[ltr][/ltr]
[ltr]It's harrowing, grisly, and distressing viewing, but it gets the point across; that would-be jihadists should think twice before joining in on the barbaric actions taking place in the so called caliphate.[/ltr]
[ltr]Using the group's own propaganda against them, the sickening scenes show men being slaughtered through crucifixion, decapitated bodies and mosques being blown up.[/ltr]



[ltr][/ltr]



[ltr]http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/09/06/islamic-state-militants-us-state-department-video_n_5776964.html?utm_hp_ref=uk[/ltr]

I watched that through my fingers.  I don't quite know what to think of it to be honest.  Was it really issued by the US State Department?

Frazzled wrote:I watched that through my fingers.  I don't quite know what to think of it to be honest.  Was it really issued by the US State Department?

It was -- I thought it was in really poor taste.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Frazzled wrote:I watched that through my fingers.  I don't quite know what to think of it to be honest.  Was it really issued by the US State Department?

It was -- I thought it was in really poor taste.

How is it poor taste?
This is not just a war being thought on the ground, but through the media and it shows the reality of those part of this group, it is meant to be hard hitting and shocking and this is part of the problem, people need to wake up this fact.
If I showed you a video about the threat of Nazism, through clips of what they did to many ethnic groups with killings, would it be in poor taste?
Hardly, it shows the reality of one of the darkest events in history of which has helped warn us all of the dangers of such hate, this does the same in the present showing the reality of the hate of this group and how they care little for anyone. You only learn of the evil of such groups by seeing first hand what they are capable of.


Night

Ben,oh ben, "it was in poor taste" you do not have the faintest idea what one man can do to another.YOU sit there well fed ,safe in your own little world when inother countries the most terrible acts of torture and killing are commonplace and the only thing you can say in defence of your country is "it was in poor taste" i could sit down and cry!!!

Nicko, we do at least have some idea of what goes on in places like North Korea and other Asian countries,  North Africa, the Middle East, the Far East  and even in places closer to home like Russia.  We do not go through life deaf and blind.  I know you have seen active service, have killed and seen people killed, but I find your attitude very patronising.  We may not have witnessed it at first hand but we can read.

Frazzled wrote:Nicko, we do at least have some idea of what goes on in places like North Korea and other Asian countries,  North Africa, the Middle East, the Far East  and even in places closer to home like Russia.  We do not go through life deaf and blind.  I know you have seen active service, have killed and seen people killed, but I find your attitude very patronising.  We may not have witnessed it at first hand but we can read.

He is not being patronizing but very factual, you have no conception, he does and is why some on the left have no grip of reality.
Again I refer you to the holocaust, should we not show tv documentaries on the horror of the holocaust as a warning from history?
An idea is far removed from actually experiencing something which includes myself, it maybe prudent that you speak to any surviving holocaust survivors to engage what we are both saying.

How do you think they should show IS?
Playing poker?

By the way the last comment I made was patronizing for you to understand the difference.

Didge wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Nicko, we do at least have some idea of what goes on in places like North Korea and other Asian countries,  North Africa, the Middle East, the Far East  and even in places closer to home like Russia.  We do not go through life deaf and blind.  I know you have seen active service, have killed and seen people killed, but I find your attitude very patronising.  We may not have witnessed it at first hand but we can read.

He is not being patronizing but very factual, you have no conception, he does and is why some on the left have no grip of reality.
Again I refer you to the holocaust, should we not show tv documentaries on the horror of the holocaust as a warning from history?
An idea is far removed from actually experiencing something which includes myself, it maybe prudent that you speak to any surviving holocaust survivors to engage what we are both saying.

How do you think they should show IS?
Playing poker?

I wasn't talking about the video as such, but the way Nicko talks as if we know nothing of what is going on in other parts of the world.  And I do understand the meaning of the word 'patronising', but thanks anyway.

Frazzled wrote:

Didge wrote:


He is not being patronizing but very factual, you have no conception, he does and is why some on the left have no grip of reality.
Again I refer you to the holocaust, should we not show tv documentaries on the horror of the holocaust as a warning from history?
An idea is far removed from actually experiencing something which includes myself, it maybe prudent that you speak to any surviving holocaust survivors to engage what we are both saying.

How do you think they should show IS?
Playing poker?

I wasn't talking about the video as such, but the way Nicko talks as if we know nothing of what is going on in other parts of the world.  And I do understand the meaning of the word 'patronising', but thanks anyway.

Because he does understand what men are capable of with the experience of combat, have you never even studied Vietnam, Northern Ireland etc for example?
It shows he knows and has seen the capabilities of what men can do, you have not, myself included, we can only imagine which is far removed from seeing yourself, which is not being patronizing, but factual, showing you do not understand the meaning of the word.
So you do know nothing of such situations, all you can learn is from others experiences, which gives you only an idea of them, nothing more.

Thanks Didge, you put it better than i can. I had no intention of being "patronising" and i can't see where i have been. I only put down the truth as i see it.

nicko wrote:Thanks Didge, you put it better than i can.  I had no intention  of being "patronising"  and i can't see where i have been. I only put down the truth as i see it.

No problem Nicko.

YOU sit there well fed ,safe in your own little world when inother countries the most terrible acts of torture and killing are commonplace and the only thing you can say in defence of your country is "it was in poor taste"

That's not patronizing?

I know the evil things ISIS has been up to; I don't need my tax dollars being spent on a graphic video to become informed. Apparently my government thinks other people do need to watch someone being crucified by ISIS before they can possibly understand that ISIS is bad. I find that a bit patronizing as well, and yes, also in poor taste.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

YOU sit there well fed ,safe in your own little world when inother countries the most terrible acts of torture and killing are commonplace and the only thing you can say in defence of your country is "it was in poor taste"

That's not patronizing?

I know the evil things ISIS has been up to; I don't need my tax dollars being spent on a graphic video to become informed. Apparently my government thinks other people do need to watch someone being crucified by ISIS before they can possibly understand that ISIS is bad. I find that a bit patronizing as well, and yes, also in poor taste.

Again this is also a media war Ben and thus find it very real of what they are capable of and going off your own view does not mean every one can visualize something as well as you can.
To gauge my point ask how many people have read about the Holocaust for example and then actually watched film clips on the matter to see their reactions, as words can only paint half a picture of the event, film does it far better, because it shows the reality of the crimes and is far more hard hitting and gains for people a far better understanding.

So why is it in poor taste?

Didge wrote:

Frazzled wrote:
I wasn't talking about the video as such, but the way Nicko talks as if we know nothing of what is going on in other parts of the world.  And I do understand the meaning of the word 'patronising', but thanks anyway.

Because he does understand what men are capable of with the experience of combat, have you never even studied Vietnam, Northern Ireland etc for example?
It shows he knows and has seen the capabilities of what men can do, you have not, myself included, we can only imagine which is far removed from seeing yourself, which is not being patronizing, but factual, showing you do not understand the meaning of the word.
So you do know nothing of such situations, all you can learn is from others experiences, which gives you only an idea of them, nothing more.

Once again, I didn't say I knew everything, I just said I knew more than the 'nothing' that was implied.  I come from a military family, my brother died in N Ireland, my ex husband was in the REMEs although he didn't see active service, my grandfather died in the Somme.  I do not like being told that I know nothing of the suffering of others.

Frazzled wrote:

Didge wrote:


Because he does understand what men are capable of with the experience of combat, have you never even studied Vietnam, Northern Ireland etc for example?
It shows he knows and has seen the capabilities of what men can do, you have not, myself included, we can only imagine which is far removed from seeing yourself, which is not being patronizing, but factual, showing you do not understand the meaning of the word.
So you do know nothing of such situations, all you can learn is from others experiences, which gives you only an idea of them, nothing more.

Once again, I didn't say I knew everything, I just said I knew more than the 'nothing' that was implied.  I come from a military family, my brother died in N Ireland, my ex husband was in the REMEs although he didn't see active service, my grandfather died in the Somme.  I do not like being told that I know nothing of the suffering of others.

You still do not, my family were in the military also, all you can gain, which is the same for me, is from others, which can help you gauge an idea and also how they tell of their experiences, but not of the experience itself, you can only imagine it. You can of course experience how they live after such events, which is different.
You thus only know of some soldiers who have experienced combat, but not of the experience itself and you miss the whole point that you jumped in wrongly to claim someone was being patronizing when they were not.

Oh Jesus, I give up.

I lost 2 Irish uncles in Northern Ireland, both Catholics and in the RUC, my father and one of my brothers served in the British army and I am half Irish myself. I think the IRA are scum, even though I hope one day for a united Ireland.

Sorry for the loss of your brother.

Frazzled wrote:Oh Jesus, I give up.

That is because you think you know something when you can only picture it, as only I can, my grand parents fought both in WW2 and saw what it did to both of them, and only could learn from them what they experienced, but could never hope to know what it was like, only they could.
Sorry but that is the reality.

The name is Didge by the way, not Jesus.

Didge wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Oh Jesus, I give up.

That is because you think you know something when you can only picture it, as only I can, my grand parents fought both in WW2 and saw what it did to both of them, and only could learn from them what they experienced, but could never hope to know what it was like, only they could.
Sorry but that is the reality.

I never claimed to be able to do more than picture it, although a written report can be pretty graphic.
I just said that this quote from Nicko, especially the bit where he says "you do not have the faintest idea what one man can do to another" was patronising and I stand by that.  We may not have seen it, we may not have been there but to claim we don't have the faintest idea is wrong.  Before you say it, I know the remark was addressed to Ben rather than me but this is a forum and I have the right to reply.


"Ben,oh ben, "it was in poor taste" you do not have the faintest idea what one man can do to another.YOU sit there well fed ,safe in your own little world when inother countries the most terrible acts of torture and killing are commonplace and the only thing you can say in defence of your country is "it was in poor taste" i could sit down and cry!!!"

Frazzled wrote:

Didge wrote:

That is because you think you know something when you can only picture it, as only I can, my grand parents fought both in WW2 and saw what it did to both of them, and only could learn from them what they experienced, but could never hope to know what it was like, only they could.
Sorry but that is the reality.

I never claimed to be able to do more than picture it, although a written report can be pretty graphic.
I just said that this quote from Nicko, especially the bit where he says "you do not have the faintest idea what one man can do to another" was patronising and I stand by that.  We may not have seen it, we may not have been there but to claim we don't have the faintest idea is wrong.  Before you say it, I know the remark was addressed to Ben rather than me but this is a forum and I have the right to reply.


"Ben,oh ben, "it was in poor taste" you do not have the faintest idea what one man can do to another.YOU sit there well fed ,safe in your own little world when inother countries the most terrible acts of torture and killing are commonplace and the only thing you can say in defence of your country is "it was in poor taste" i could sit down and cry!!!"

The reality is though Ben would have no idea, and that is no insult to Ben and he never took it as one because the reality is, he would not, which is why Nicko stated it. Reading or watching something is not the same as experiencing. It is not patronizing, it is a matter of fact.
I mean how many times have you been in person to witness someone have their life taken away from them brutally.
So his point is true, you can only picture or think you know, but the reality is you do not know until you experience, so Ben would not, as you would not, as I would not have any idea.
I spent an exhaustive amount of time talking to WW2 veterans of their combat experience, for my studies and still to this day have no idea what they experienced, because it would be impossible unless I faced it myself, which is the point you are missing. It would be like me claiming I know what it is like to give birth from watching it, most women would batter me for making such a absurd claim, because I would have no idea.

Now do you understand?

But you understand that giving birth involves several hours of pain culminating in trying to squeeze a large object through a smaller opening, so it would be wrong to say you do not have "the faintest idea".

Now do YOU understand?

Anyway, I am not going to hang around in this thread being addressed as though I'm some sort of imbecile who has no knowledge of the sort of thing that goes on between aggressors and captives in countries like those mentioned just because I haven't seen it.

Frazzled wrote:But you understand that giving birth involves several hours of pain culminating in trying to squeeze a large object through a smaller opening, so it would be wrong to say you do not have "the faintest idea".

Now do YOU understand?

Anyway, I am not going to hang around in this thread being addressed as though I'm some sort of imbecile who has no knowledge of the sort of thing that goes on between aggressors and captives in countries like those mentioned just because I haven't seen it.

Dear me you present a poor argument, again I would have no idea of the pain level even though I have passed kidney stones at 19, so again I would have no idea, as they are small in comparison to a baby being born, so stop being absurd please.
The reality is you have no idea, it is why when people actually face such experiences it is nothing like they imagined and if you do not believe me, ask any soldier or read experiences they have had and they will tell you the same it was nothing like they imagined, hence why I know you are talking nonsense here.

Nobody claimed you were an imbecile, typical victim status alert from the left as usual when unable to counter your point, only that you have no idea of an experience if you have not faced it, which you do not, as easily pointed out to you.

Obviously we don't have to live out every single experience in order to be informed about it. It's not that I understand what it's like to live under ISIS rule in every exquisite detail, but I certainly am not sitting here clueless like nicko implied in his comment, which was what was patronizing. I will never give birth to a child -- nonetheless, I'm pretty well-informed on the idea that it's very painful, not sitting here thinking that women just pop out babies effortlessly ...

As far as my "in poor taste" comment goes, maybe I didn't explain myself well. I certainly believe in communicating the horrors of what ISIS does, and I certainly don't believe that should be whitewashed, but these acts of violence happened to real people who deserve a bit more respect than to have the stories of their suffering turned into U.S. government propaganda -- just my opinion.

That is naive, if anything their story should be told, otherwise they are just another statistic on paper, here you have faces to real people who have been butchered, to capture the reality of this. That more than anything shows the harsh reality of what they have endured and we do not stop short again of showing how Germans line up countless Jews and shot them in the back of the head, so your reasoning is poor again on this Ben.

Sorry but you are clueless to the reality of this, being that you can only look at pictures of film and have never experience up close the capabilities of evil people, that is not knocking you Ben, but a fact. The reality is your whole counter is based off how you feel and not how other people are certainly not aware of the horrors

Are you saying Ben we should never post such pictures like this?





Is this in poor taste to the victims, or placing a face to real people?

nicko wrote:Ben,oh ben, "it was in poor taste"  you do not have the faintest idea what one man can do to another.YOU sit there well fed ,safe in your own little world when inother countries the most terrible acts of torture and killing are commonplace and the only thing you can say in defence of your country is "it was in poor taste"  i could sit down and cry!!!

Take it easy nicko. You do exhibit a kind of perverse joy at having had the experience. Best not to brag too much.

Original Quill wrote:

nicko wrote:Ben,oh ben, "it was in poor taste"  you do not have the faintest idea what one man can do to another.YOU sit there well fed ,safe in your own little world when inother countries the most terrible acts of torture and killing are commonplace and the only thing you can say in defence of your country is "it was in poor taste"  i could sit down and cry!!!

Take it easy nicko.  You do exhibit a kind of perverse joy at having had the experience.  Best not to brag too much.

Shows how people mistake words, when he has already stated how much he would have rather talked to the people he had no choice to kill, this is why you are an idiot at times Quill

Please people, i did not mean to start an argument and cause bad feelings over this, Maybe some took my comments the wrong way. If this is the case i apoligise, let's drop it,ok?

Didge wrote:Are you saying Ben we should never post such pictures like this?





Is this in poor taste to the victims, or placing a face to real people?

I think it depends upon what your goal is. Are you trying to be a propagandist? Then yes, I guess that is consistent with the goal.

But if it's for a mere distasteful shock value, or it offends...not good. Didge, you do take events in the Middle East far too personally, and you end up taking things to extremes.

nicko wrote:Please people, i did not mean to start an argument and cause bad feelings over this, Maybe some took my comments the wrong way. If this is the case i apoligise, let's drop it,ok?

My apologies Nicko, but I do not think it is right to mock people dues to the actions of combat. I have no doubt some soldiers have had some sickening pleasure out of killing people, but from what I have read and spoken to others, this is further from the truth, where it haunts many of them and is not something to ridicule them with, especially when they would have no comprehension of combat themselves.

Original Quill wrote:

Didge wrote:Are you saying Ben we should never post such pictures like this?





Is this in poor taste to the victims, or placing a face to real people?

I think it depends upon what your goal is.  Are you trying to be a propagandist?  Then yes, I guess that is consistent with the goal.

But if it's for a mere distasteful shock value, or it offends...not good.  Didge, you do take events in the Middle East far too personally, and you end up taking things to extremes.

No I take lessons from history and what is the most effective way to show the dangers of such evil than to put faces to real people that have endured such horrors. If you think this is wrong then we might as well censor any films, documentaries and pictures of such events, which is nothing short of the PC culture by some today.
The goal is to warn of the horrors of IS and the best way is through shock factor.

To further explain my point to Ben, I had seen and read about suicides and only imagined what that would be like to actually see, until I did. I witness 3 suicides, whilst working for British Rail whilst studying and it was nothing like I imagined. Not only is it bad enough that you picture that last moment of that persons, but to go down and locate their remains is not something I would wish upon anyone.
This is why I say people do not know what they think they do until they actually experience it, because for anyone it is never like they imagine or picture.

Leaving aside the question of whether one can understand something without experiencing it ...

I'm trying really hard here to paint a big black line between what any of us might have to say and what the U.S. government says. And maybe I'm just a bit creeped out by how similar this is to what was done during the Bush era. Bottom line, I don't trust them to be objective, and I think the best move after all the historical examples of governments twisting the facts about this or that in order to bolster their positions is simply for them to point to what more objective sources have to say. (And yes, I do remember how well that went with Cheney and the New York Times )

That's it, I'm frazzled. Wait no, I'm Ben. Screw it, I'm going to bed.

Didge wrote:No I take lessons from history and what is the most effective way to show the dangers of such evil than to put faces to real people that have endured such horrors. If you think this is wrong then we might as well censor any films, documentaries and pictures of such events, which is nothing short of the PC culture by some today.
The goal is to warn of the horrors of IS and the best way is through shock factor.

You are surpassing your goal, and I think that's what is bothering people. Either you have some other goal, or you are just posting for shock value.

Everybody knows already what is going on with the ISIL. At this point it is not worthy of either news, or deliberation format. It's in the background of every discussion we have, we don't need graphics.

Ben_Reilly wrote:Leaving aside the question of whether one can understand something without experiencing it ...

I'm trying really hard here to paint a big black line between what any of us might have to say and what the U.S. government says. And maybe I'm just a bit creeped out by how similar this is to what was done during the Bush era. Bottom line, I don't trust them to be objective, and I think the best move after all the historical examples of governments twisting the facts about this or that in order to bolster their positions is simply for them to point to what more objective sources have to say. (And yes, I do remember how well that went with Cheney and the New York Times )

That's it, I'm frazzled. Wait no, I'm Ben. Screw it, I'm going to bed.

What is there to twist here?
The reality is people are being butchered, raped etc, that is fact and this video exposes the reality of that.
The lies were wrong on weapons of mass destruction, but there is no doubt, SH was a mass murderer, who did actually use chemical weapons against the Kurds. The reality is he was a criminal and yes it was wrong to go to war because of lies, but was it because he was a murderer?
No, this is where people get their views wrong and it is the problem of religious divide itself and ethnic hatred between groups in the middle East that is the problem. Most countries freed from oppression, look to build upon this chance, not make it worse. The reality that has not been taken into account is centuries old feuds and hatreds have erupted, where before they were kept under check by tyrannies. This has also more to do with some Muslims believing their countries are losing their religious identity. This is what we need to look at and the stark reality is even if we had not ousted Saddam and somebody else had, this problem would have still existed, being as seen because of the hatred between religious ad ethnic groups. This is being overlooked to blame the west when in reality the West has tried to help, to use beliefs the west is out to destroy Islam, is just a excuse used by Muslims to promote hatred. There was no invasion of Syria, people rose up for democratic ways, with their plea for help fell on deaf ears and now hundreds of thousands are dead, because again the extremists have capitalized on this, being as they are very well funded by Muslim states, all of which people over look

Original Quill wrote:

Didge wrote:No I take lessons from history and what is the most effective way to show the dangers of such evil than to put faces to real people that have endured such horrors. If you think this is wrong then we might as well censor any films, documentaries and pictures of such events, which is nothing short of the PC culture by some today.
The goal is to warn of the horrors of IS and the best way is through shock factor.

You are surpassing your goal, and I think that's what is bothering people.  Either you have some other goal, or you are just posting for shock value.

Everybody knows already what is going on with the ISIL.  At this point it is not worthy of either news, or deliberation format.  It's in the background of every discussion we have, we don't need graphics.

That is again basing this on your own knowledge of the situation, where again not everyone is as aware of as much as you Quill, which is why you only see things through your own eyes and not others. The goal here is to unite the world against IS, by doing this you show the full horrors of what they are capable of.
This video was actually directed at Muslims, for that very reason.

Just read the comment by Quill, "best not to brag too much" what the fucking hell do you mean by that? i was not bragging you simple minded idiot, just telling how it was. What a fucking prat!!

Afternoon folks. I must say I quite agree with Didge, ie: The shock factor! There are many in this world who are wrapped up in themselves and their little world and may not realise what is going on elsewhere. The atrocities committed by Is, and any other organization, should be made public, as much as possible, worldwide. By doing this it ensures that there is no doubt as to whom is evil, and, hopefully, any sympathies for such evil people will dissipate, when others know the truth. As you know, Moslems in this country, UK, have been appraised of the situation in Syria etc, and are distancing themselves from such extremism. As horrible and evil as it is, beheadings and other such brutality, should be brought to the general public's attention.

I like to think that our ethics and morals in the West are the right ones, and consideration for the welfare of others, at home and abroad, should be considered. Therefore, and based on our moral and humane codes, IS should be surrounded by Nato forces on the ground, and exterminated, for the inhuman beasts they are.

stardesk wrote:Afternoon folks. I must say I quite agree with Didge, ie: The shock factor! There are many in this world who are wrapped up in themselves and their little world and may not realise what is going on elsewhere. The atrocities committed by Is, and any other organization, should be made public, as much as possible, worldwide. By doing this it ensures that there is no doubt as to whom is evil, and, hopefully, any sympathies for such evil people will dissipate, when others know the truth. As you know, Moslems in this country, UK, have been appraised of the situation in Syria etc, and are distancing themselves from such extremism. As horrible and evil as it is, beheadings and other such brutality, should be brought to the general public's attention.

I like to think that our ethics and morals in the West are the right ones, and consideration for the welfare of others, at home and abroad, should be considered. Therefore, and based on our moral and humane codes, IS should be surrounded by Nato forces on the ground, and exterminated, for the inhuman beasts they are.

You say you like "shock" but then you change the subject and talk about "atrocities" and how its a civic duty to oppose "evil people". I dislike the shock factor because it is prurient and ugly, yet I still am opposed to evil people. Stardust you seem somehow to think prurient and ugly is a good thing.

By way of example, would you use blatant porn to teach reproductive anatomy? In my opinion there are better ways to do it. To be sure, you would get attention, but at the risk of losing the message.

There are some who want to link the "atrocities" to certain innocent religious ideologies. The best way to do that is to mess with the symbols. Hence:

Atrocities = sick people

becomes:

Atrocities = Muslims

You can disclaim it as your motive all you want, but we both know it is happening. At the least, it is elitist to suggest that the ignorant masses need your sermons.

Original Quill wrote:

stardesk wrote:Afternoon folks. I must say I quite agree with Didge, ie: The shock factor! There are many in this world who are wrapped up in themselves and their little world and may not realise what is going on elsewhere. The atrocities committed by Is, and any other organization, should be made public, as much as possible, worldwide. By doing this it ensures that there is no doubt as to whom is evil, and, hopefully, any sympathies for such evil people will dissipate, when others know the truth. As you know, Moslems in this country, UK, have been appraised of the situation in Syria etc, and are distancing themselves from such extremism. As horrible and evil as it is, beheadings and other such brutality, should be brought to the general public's attention.

I like to think that our ethics and morals in the West are the right ones, and consideration for the welfare of others, at home and abroad, should be considered. Therefore, and based on our moral and humane codes, IS should be surrounded by Nato forces on the ground, and exterminated, for the inhuman beasts they are.

You say you like "shock" but then you change the subject and talk about "atrocities" and how its a civic duty to oppose "evil people".  I dislike the shock factor because it is prurient and ugly, yet I still am opposed to evil people.  Stardust you seem somehow to think prurient and ugly is a good thing.

By way of example, would you use blatant porn to teach reproductive anatomy?  In my opinion there are better ways to do it.  To be sure, you would get attention, but at the risk of losing the message.

There are some who want to link the "atrocities" to certain innocent religious ideologies.  The best way to do that is to mess with the symbols.  Hence:

Atrocities = sick people

becomes:

Atrocities = Muslims

You can disclaim it as your motive all you want, but we both know it is happening.  At the least, it is elitist to suggest that the ignorant masses need your sermons.

That is a absurd last view point, are you now saying the Nazi's were not German? Not all were but many actively sided with them and were certainly complicit in the atrocities.
This is a religious ideology behind the violence, do you see Tibetan monks as suicide bombers in occupied Tibet? No, the fundamentals of those following the extreme version of Islam have their fundamental core beliefs in Islam, one of Jihad and martyrdom, that is undeniable.

The reality is this video is being presented to Muslims, which is where the problem is being the fact they are being recruited by extremist propaganda, and at present as stated before the counter affect from the Muslim community is having little affect stemming those being recruited.


So I will offer you a challenge, you present the evils of the Holocaust just in words compared to what I will provide and see what is more effective in showing the true horror of this event?

Didge wrote:That is a absurd last view point, are you now saying the Nazi's were not German? Not all were but many actively sided with them and were certainly complicit in the atrocities.
This is a religious ideology behind the violence, do you see Tibetan monks as suicide bombers in occupied Tibet? No, the fundamentals of those following the extreme version of Islam have their fundamental core beliefs in Islam, one of Jihad and martyrdom, that is undeniable.

No…I don’t think Muslims are the bad guys, as you seem to be suggesting (‘Nazis were Germans’ in your analogy).  If the ‘shocking revelation’ were shown for the first time, it would be for informational purposes.  But to repeatedly show it over and over is to propagandize by use of the ‘shock’ value.  I think that is trading in the prurient and insulting you your listener.

Didge wrote:The reality is this video is being presented to Muslims, which is where the problem is being the fact they are being recruited by extremist propaganda, and at present as stated before the counter affect from the Muslim community is having little affect stemming those being recruited.

No, actually this time the reality is you are presenting it to us.  And that is my point: they have a propagandizing mission, and so do you.  You can argue that you are fighting fire with fire, but in fact what you are doing is insulting your audience, who has already heard the news and doesn’t need it repeated again and again.  

Didge wrote:So I will offer you a challenge, you present the evils of the Holocaust just in words compared to what I will provide and see what is more effective in showing the true horror of this event?

The crucial words are “true horror.”  Why is it an obsession to convey horror over information?  Are we indulging in the prurient?  As I said above, I could teach anatomy using porn pictures, but I’m not sure it would convey the same message.

Here's another grisly warning:   

Point one:
Never made any claim all Muslims, but those committing the atrocities are Muslims. Again the reality of all these issue in the Middle East stem from ethnic and religious divide, with also the fear of losing religious identity and control within the region. This is why people are misleading themselves over an issue here, where the core issue is around the identity of a faith and its core tenants being used to commit violence. This does not mean all Muslims are violent, far from it, but the very core factor of the faith is being used to commit atrocities, all of which this divide and division between Islam has gone on for centuries. It has only been able to surface through the help of funds from rich Arab states, trying to impose their doctrine over the other. The real fight and enemies here are Iran and Saudi, two major players from the different sects. They are the ones that have further created the divisions and fueled the hate.

Point two:
Incorrect, it is showing the evils of a group of people and what we are facing and having to deal with, a group of people that has no compassion for the sanctity of life, which the more it is shown the more it is clear in peoples minds what we are dealing with. We teach constantly daily about the holocaust and to push it back into the bylines is a big mistake as it will never lose any of its horror the main point of keep showing such events in history. What you are doing is saying you do not need to keep seeing, that is your choice, those others need reminding. This is a propaganda war as well, one that is being lost at present, because nothing is stopping or stemming the recruits to Islamic extremism

Point Three: Because to gain information about the horrors you need to see for yourself how bad they were and when combined they are very powerful, more so than just words, which is why you know you would not be up to the challenge I have proposed, because you would not be able to grasp the same sense of the appalling crime. It is not insulting the listener and we should never forget such an appalling crime, which the best way is to keep showing such events from history:

I should of added Quill, how may here know the full extent of what the Einsatzgruppen did?

Frazzled wrote:Here's another grisly warning:   

Are you seriously comparing one of the many daft and absurd claims from the Daily Mail to a video that is factual about IS?

Quill, forgive me for saying this but you come across as though you're defending IS and other extremists. I would suggest you try to put your opinions across in a different way, otherwise people will egt the wrong impression of you. I mean no insult to you but do try a different expression.

As Didge has highlighted, the Nazis were just as bad, gasing the Jews, dumping people in trenches and then shooting them. Many are the crimes they committed. Most wars and armed uprisings are intended to take territory, or take control of their country. Extremism geared to faith and/or politics.
Should we turn a blind eye to such atrocities, just because it isn't in our country. Should we say it isn't our problem, let them sort themselves out? No, of course not. We have the means and the power to put an end to many conflicts in this world, and so we should.

Didge wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Here's another grisly warning:   

Are you seriously comparing one of the many daft and absurd claims from the Daily Mail to a video that is factual about IS?

No, I thought it make make you laugh.

stardesk wrote:Quill, forgive me for saying this but you come across as though you're defending IS and other extremists. I would suggest you try to put your opinions across in a different way, otherwise people will egt the wrong impression of you. I mean no insult to you but do try a different expression.

Of course…and thank you for bringing that to my attention.  The dialectic with which I deal is not ISIL v. the good guys, it is irrationality v. ‘thought before action’.  ISIL is just another tosser group trying to grab for power in the region, like al Qaeda and the Taliban.  I question whether they warrant our lives and resources.

While I recognize that such groups are out there, my issue has to do with the West’s response…and the US in particular.  My opponents in this dialectic are the short-sighted people who wave their arms and scream the sky is falling, the sky is falling every time a new threat comes along.  I believe war is far too dangerous to use as cocktail banter.  Nor can we casually threaten.  When you start something, it doesn’t go away, as we learned in Iraq and Afghanistan.

After we won WWII, we seemed to recognize how irresponsible it was to suggest dropping a nuclear device on every adversary; but we have failed to recognize that waging war is just as reckless.  Look at the parade of wars the US has been involved in just since WWII: Korea, Lebanon, Vietnam, Grenada, El Salvador, Honduras, Panama, Iraq and Kuwait, Zaire, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Somalia, Haiti, the War in Afghanistan, and of course the second War in Iraq, the latter two lasting some 10-11 years.  I don’t support the insurgents in any one of those conflicts…I just question the rationality of entering a conflict with no clear purpose, and certainly no end-game.

stardesk wrote:As Didge has highlighted, the Nazis were just as bad, gasing the Jews, dumping people in trenches and then shooting them. Many are the crimes they committed. Most wars and armed uprisings are intended to take territory, or take control of their country. Extremism geared to faith and/or politics.
Should we turn a blind eye to such atrocities, just because it isn't in our country. Should we say it isn't our problem, let them sort themselves out? No, of course not. We have the means and the power to put an end to many conflicts in this world, and so we should.

The point is not about the Nazis and Jews.  Most comparisons and examples are rhetorical devices offered to persuade, not as proof.  Comparisons and examples may be valid, or they may be used to excite passions and lead analysis in the wrong direction.

Is there a valid comparison between ISIL and Nazi Germany?  I don’t think so.  Germany was a nation-state that had the resources to rise and threaten in a co-equal way.  The Jews were a cohesive group.  ISIL is an insurgent group…and we are being maneuvered to become opposed to a media event.  Chopping off one’s head is a Hollywood stunt, as horrible as it is.  It’s a murder, not a military action on Pearl Harbor.  It’s something that should concern police agencies, not armies.  The big problem with ISIL—and the main stumbling block—is the comparative weakness, if not the non-existence of its adversaries to stand up to them.

The concern with the Levant and Iraq is that we—the US, NATO and the West—have no idea what to do in the long term.  Why are we opposed to a joined state of Levant and Iraq?  Do we have the right to be opposed to it?  I ask not rhetorically, but genuinely…can anyone answer those two questions?  Yet there is no one else, as you point out Stardust.

So we have lots of big, heavy boots, and a void of purpose.  ISIL is not an adversary, but a symptom.  As the press has been pointing out, there are lots of groups in Syria that are milling around…most of whom we have been warring with at some time or another.  We have NO ONE to side with.  We have no one to be champion for as we did in WWII. No Poland. No Philippines.  Yet, on the other hand, Iraq and Levant is/are not our territory.  And that’s what I mean when I say we have no business there—that’s what I mean when I say it isn’t our problem.

I wrote an article ten years ago, which remains unpublished, in which I asserted the three elements necessary for peacemaking.  I called it The Three Ayes of Peacemaking: Internal, Inclusive and Integrative.  Perhaps, most important of these is Internal…peace must come from within…from among the participants within the society.  If you don’t keep it internal, you have things like Iraq running Gaza, and sacrificing Gazan mothers and children in an alternative antagonism with Israel.  Only the self can look after the self.

To wit: we have no business settling their dispute.  And if we get involved, we are going to have no purpose.  And if we have no purpose, we will again have no end-game...just another $17-trillion and 10-years down the toilet...and still in the same spot.  Thought before action, folks.