mahnmut: (An understanding has been reached.)
Just a question. The guy who shot the Russian ambassador in Turkey, he was planning to end up in heaven with all those 72 virgins, right? Except he had shaven his beard. Check-mate, Islamist terrorists!
mahnmut: (WTF-E?)
mahnmut: (Quaero togam pacem.)
mahnmut: (We're doooomed.)
Beware, Trump! He's coming for you!

[Error: unknown template video]
mahnmut: (We're doooomed.)
Apparently, Ukraine represents "whiteness" now, while Russia is... well, "less white":

Ukraine conflict: 'White power' warrior from Sweden

"It's all about how you see it," he says. "I would be an idiot if I said I did not want to see survival of white people. After World War Two, the victors wrote their history. They decided that it's always a bad thing to say I am white and I am proud."

Mr Skillt believes races should not mix. He says the Jews are not white and should not mix with white people. His next project is to go fight for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad because he believes Mr Assad is standing up to "international Zionism".

...And Assad is suddenly "white people" now. Got it.

These guys need help from a specialist.
mahnmut: (Quaero togam pacem.)
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Ideology (religion, nationalism, and all sorts of -isms) is the bane of human civilization, and the root of all evil in this world. Has always been, and will continue to be so for a long time to come.

People have the right to be assholes to other people, and other people have the right to recognize them for the assholes that they are - even if being an asshole helps bring a point through at times. But ending human lives in a gruesome and violent manner over ideology? Now that's beyond despicable. It's not just inhuman, it's NON-human. These people are not humans. They're animals.

Which still doesn't make the millions of ordinary peeps who happen to share their particular brand of mass delusion that they call religion, monsters. The temptation to label them so is particularly big in moments like these, I know. But how we humans conduct ourselves in such situations, is exactly what defines who and what we are.
mahnmut: (WTF-E?)
Isis apparently takes control of US weapons airdrop intended for Kurds

· Pentagon admits one of 28 loads missing and blames wind
· Turkey criticises arms airdrops saying the strategy will never lead to desired results
mahnmut: (We're doooomed.)
Ukraine Troops Kill 20 in Mariupol, Blow Up

While most of Ukraine’s military’s major operations against the east have come in the northern part of Donetsk Oblast, today’s attacks focused on the south, and the key port city of Mariupol, where at least 20 people have been reported killed, and massive numbers wounded.

Though the government dubbed all those killed “terrorists,” many of the people shot in the streets seem to have been unarmed civilian protesters.

Et tu, UK?

Feb. 28th, 2014 01:34 pm
mahnmut: (We're doooomed.)
Yahoo webcam images intercepted and stored

A spokeswoman for Yahoo said the actions of the surveillance agencies represented "a whole new level of violation of our users’ privacy".
mahnmut: (The Swallows have won!)
I guess this is gonna be chewed over and over for the next few days. So let's form something like a bandwagon here, buhaha.

First of all, I have to say this.

HE'S DEAD, JIM! WE KILLED HIM! AND THREW HIM IN THE SEA! AMERIKKAAAA!


No, I promise not to troll any more. Now seriously.

Just a few thoughts I'd like to throw around )


Speaking of Zawahiri... )

* credit to [livejournal.com profile] policraticus for the title
x-posted to [livejournal.com profile] talk_politics
mahnmut: (Short cut? Must be electricity.)


John Oliver explains how terrorism is terrorism only when done on Americans, but it's not really terrorism when it's done on other people.
mahnmut: (Quaero togam pacem.)
"[The plans to organize a burning of the Koran in Gainesville] is precisely the kind of action the Taliban uses and could cause significant problems. Even the rumor that it might take place has sparked demonstrations such as the one that took place in Kabul yesterday. Were the actual burning to take place, the safety of our soldiers and civilians would be put in jeopardy and accomplishment of the mission would be made more difficult."

Can you guess who pronounced those words? An anti-American, Islam-loving, terrorism-tolerating liberal, perhaps? Or someone else?

I won't leave you guessing for too long. It was a national hero, the guy who came up with the Surge idea which has made it possible for the mission in Iraq to reach a new stage, where Iraq is hopefully able to look after itself; it was the guy who was subsequently put in charge of the Afghanistan mission as well, and hopes are he'll bring it to a similar stage too. A hugely respected military commander, to whom many people on both sides of the political barricade claim they would dedicate their trust and would vote for, if he ever considers running for President.

Yes, it was Gen. Petraeus.

Of course he was just one voice in the chorus of voices who protested the plans of Rev. Terry Jones to burn Koran copies in front of his small congregation in Florida to commemorate 9-11. After the storm of outrage, Jones is claiming he's "taking the widespread criticism seriously", but it's yet to be seen what this exactly means. Again we're touching the subject of freedom of speech here, and people getting offended by "too free speech", and this is about deliberately inflaming groups of people for the sake of one's convictions (no matter how bigoted). What say you? Do you approve of his way of delivering his message that "we're warning you [Muslims] that if you attack us, we'll attack you"?

And how prevalent do you think this type of mindset is in society? Is it "no biggie", or is it a symptom of something really bigger?

And when you weigh this guy's alleged patriotism vs the type of patriotism of which Gen. Petraeus speaks, and taking in consideration the potential effects of Rev . Jones' actions for the US troops in foreign countries, where do you stand on the issues of freedom of speech, respecting other groups, and defending the interests of fellow US citizens in cases of this particular type?

By the way more anti-US demonstrations have already erupted in some cities in the Middle East, with flag burning, Allah Aqbar shouts and all the respective paraphernalia - and that, as a direct consequence of Rev. Jones' declared intention (note: I'm not even saying action yet). Any bets on the number of new recruits for the anti-US terrorist insurgency?

x-posted
mahnmut: (Quaero togam pacem.)
An interesting question is who decides which terrorist claims are real exactly. After the failed Times Square bomb, a Pakistani Taliban faction released a series of videos seeming to claim responsibility for the failed attack and promising further violence against the US. The authorities quickly downplayed the statements, and though that Pakistani-American suspect was arrested, officials have yet to find any proven links between him and the Taliban. So who gets to make that call?

These guys. The Worldwide Incidents Team at the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) tracks terrorist attacks and attempted attacks around the world as well as terrorist claims of responsibility. Although it's generally assumed that terrorist groups have actually done the things they say they've done, it's not unheard of for groups to take credit for attacks they didn't commit.

For instance, in the aftermath of the 2004 Madrid train bombings, the mysterious Abu Hafs al-Masri Brigades (known for talking a big game on the Internet) claimed responsibility in a letter to a London newspaper. The group (which also took credit for the 2003 US blackout, calling it "Operation Quick Lightning in the Land of the Tyrant of This Generation") was later determined to be just seeking attention. Palestinian militant groups are also notorious for issuing competing claims of responsibility for attacks on Israel.

So the NCTC evaluates claims based on what's known about the groups' competence, track record, operating methods etc, and assigns their statements 1-5 levels of credibility: likely, plausible, unknown, unlikely, and inferred. 'Inferred' refers to attacks in which there's no claim but a particular group's responsibility can be assumed based on the 'attack signature' (factors such as timing, location and methods used).

The NCTC generally only releases more credible claims to the public, but keeps all of them in a classified record (even the most dubious) in case new information comes to light that prompts a re-evaluation.

After all, today's bigmouths could be tomorrow's bad guys.
mahnmut: (Silence!! I kill U!!!)
http://www.france24.com/20091012-italy-milan-bomb-attack-army-barracks-libyan-injures-two

Basically, this morning a 35-years-old Lybian, living legally in Milan, carried out single-handedly an attack against the Army barracks in piazzale Perrucchetti, in the western suburbs.

That is: he tried to. He tried to carry through the gates a homemade bomb (2 kg of ammonium nitrate), was blocked by a soldier (as that entrance is only for military personnel), and hit the detonator. This resulted in the soldier getting a minor wound, and the would-be terrorist getting third-degree burns, major damage to both eyes, some bone fractures, and splinters all over the body. He's currently hospitalized and being watched by the Carabinieri.

On hearing about this, Osama was heard saying: WTF, N00B!?
In his turn, the disgruntled Gaddafi interrupted a 3.5-hour speech, saying: FUCKIN LAMER OMGZ! :-D

Page generated Sep. 21st, 2017 08:34 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios