...what a shame.
Junaid Hussain, the UK fugitive hacker turned ISIS recruiter, has reportedly been killed in a US drone strike in Syria. The former member of hacking group TeaMp0isoN (nickname TriCk) was jailed in 2012 for hacking into the email account of an aide to Tony Blair and subsequently posting contact details and personal information …
your enemy "sympathies" to the CIA and GHCQ!
Any person who exhibits that kind of empathy for anyone fighting for ISIS/ISIL/DAESH should be rounded up and locked up for a long time. You are obviously untrustworthy.
I notice you deliberately didn't include any of the American or Allied dead or wounded in your figures just to slant your argument. I'm sure that you are quoting figures from ISIS sources which helps prove my point.
This guy was a high level operative in ISIS. That alone makes him a target, but the fact he was a fugitive from the UK, a hacker and a recruiter for them makes him wanted all the more.
Too bad, boo hoo, another murdering terrorist gone.
Without wishing to trivialize the the rights and wrongs of what that kid did... Given the amount of violence and insanity being attributed to ISIS I do wonder *why* a kid in his early 20s managed to rank as the #3 person the US authorities wanted dead. If the kid was a recruiter and important enough to merit a #3 on the kill list I'd be expecting them to take the kid alive and find out what he knows. I wonder if the reason for the kid's high ranking on the list was down to dear old Tony Blair or the Pentagon Twatterati nominating him for the #3 spot.
I suspect he was the #3 on the list because the authorities don't know the identities of the hundreds of people more important than him within ISIS. Most likely they have only been able to positively identify a very small number of the ISIS management team. This kid made it easy for them by being all over the internet.
Quite ironic and a little depressing that this results in his own death being glorified and celebrated by some of the posters on here.
I celebrate it unashamedly. ISIS can suck my balls. That is all.
ETA: There's a few posts further down that conflate Islam & ISIS. I don't. I have a few (admittedly very few) muslim friends and they simply don't recognise that interpretation of their religion.
The problem (or one of the problems) is that heavyweight air attacks will create innocent casualties in significant numbers. That would not be popular in the UK. Furthermore those casualties are likely to be Syrian citizens. Furthermore the government of Syria hasn't authorized such attacks. Furthermore Russia backs the recognised government of Syria. (Also China? )
So going down that route, things might spin completely out of control, and end up with WW3. Which is actually what ISIS wants, if you can believe their propaganda.
> Which is actually what ISIS wants, if you can believe their propaganda.
Also huge swathes of the population in the U.S.
Not least that most of them don't have a clue what's going on outside or only have a stunned stoats comprehension of politics outside the US, but most of them think the consequences don't matter to them as they'll all be raptured before that.
Sorry but napalm has been banished from almost all nations arsenals including the US. However, in the case of the daesh, I can see where exceptions should be made. They don't understand anything except brute force, nor do they follow any "civilized" warfare rules. At this point, I'm all for the thermonuclear response and turn their major power centers into glass. They hope to meet Allah... they should be helped on their journey.
" At this point, I'm all for the thermonuclear response and turn their major power centers into glass"
But what of all the occupied civilian centres? What about the people that ISIS are oppressing right now? Are they "acceptable casualties" or "collateral"?
I'm not sure I could take that cold decision, no matter how tempting it is...
I’m sorry to say this but the spectacles of hate need to be removed. I dare anyone on here to google Islamic research foundation and spend a few minutes looking at what you find. I am sure that you will find that Islam is a religion of peace, tolerance, justice, kindness, charity, love and worshiping one God.
The prophet Mohammed (Peace be upon him) was verbally abused, ridiculed, had objects thrown at him, spat at and even beaten. He reacted by having mercy on people and treating them with patience and kindness throughout his life.
When we differ in our opinions, we shouldn’t be abusive or threatening. This was not the way of the prophet Mohammed ( PBUH) with believers and disbelievers. Thank you.
" I am sure that you will find that Islam is a religion of peace, tolerance, justice, kindness, charity, love and worshiping one God."
Actually, no. Christians get a pass if they cough up a tax and change their shorts; but unbelievers are apparently to be shot on sight. I'm totally up for living in harmony and all that..."I do not necessarily agree with what you say; but will defend to the extent of light bruising your right to say it" but a group that would deny my right to exist can just go and fuck themselves.
Let me try to get through why I got (very) annoyed at the smooth talking I was replying to. Just the first sentence:
> I’m sorry to say this but the spectacles of hate need to be removed.
Please decide whether "spectacles of hate" refer to the comment thread we are looking at (to be removed, because baaad) or to some pretty fucking atrocious things done by ISIS?
Not even sure if the poster (account is just for this one message) is some troll. If so, congrats, you got me.
"> I’m sorry to say this but the spectacles of hate need to be removed."
"Please decide whether "spectacles of hate" refer to the comment thread we are looking at (to be removed, because baaad) or to some pretty fucking atrocious things done by ISIS?"
I read the post as applying to everyone - regardless of their creed, a rare glass half-full moment. I'm surprised you took it so negatively - which is why I reckoned you needed a long cold shower.
FWIW I haven't googled the foundation the poster suggested though. I guess that counts as a victory in the war on citizens forming their own opinion.
Islamists aren't peaceful and they advocate the death of all "Non-believers" JUST because they are different!
It's written right in the Koran and you are lying if you believe otherwise!
Until ALL Muslim religious leadership are seen on Al-Jazeera TV issuing a Fatwa against all members of ISIS and against ALL violence against people, Christian or otherwise; I will believe that an "Eye for an Eye" is the only rule I will obey regarding Islamists. They struck first and haven't even come close to getting what they deserve.
You really want a new version of the Crusades?
Because I think it's getting to be time we went back and finished the job!
Actually I have nothing against muslims, or christians or anything like that. Most muslims are pretty ok out of the ones I have met, in fact couple of years ago stayed on a predominately muslim island for about a month and everyone was lovely, I would recommend the place to anyone wanting to go there for a holiday.
However any lot who happily kill and maim for some cause like ISIS and who oppress people and will not compromise from their own twisted world view and who thinks you should die if you do not agree, well quite frankly fuck 'em.
I'm sure the prophet was etc etc etc
However the members of ISIS have shown no mercy to captives, no kindness, no patience, so as far as I'm concerned ISIS are not an islamic organisation,(and quite a few true followers of Islam say that too) and in fact, closely resemble the nazi SS in the way they treat people different to them.
And as a civilisation, we should say to ISIS "surrender or die ... your choice"
"....He reacted by having mercy on people and treating them with patience and kindness throughout his life...." Seriously? Please go read the Koran, even it is clear on how Mo had a penchant for killing those that opposed him, especially Jews (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banu_Qurayza).
Seriously? Please go read the Koran
And your point is? The Bible is full of bloodthirsty extremism, it's just that these days Christians choose not to carry out the full (and often contradictory) instructions. Go back the middle ages and they certainly did.
The problem for Islam is that it hasn't found itself, been institutionalised, bureaucratised, and got one (or two) recognised senior leaders who are sleepy old men in slippers who don't want to cause offence. Meanwhile the thugs and desperados flock to any cause as an opportunity to gain power over their fellow humans. Presumably you conflate Irish terrorism with either Catholisism, or Irish politics.
But anyway Matt, isn't it signing on day today?
"....Go back the middle ages and they certainly did...." Which just shows the irrelevance of your non-point. The difference is Christianity has evolved (and declined), whereas the ISIS crowd are determined to roll the clock back to those Middle Ages you mentioned. Your failure to see the difference is laughable.
.... and part four:
"....Presumably you conflate Irish terrorism with either Catholisism, or Irish politics....." And where did I say that Islam = terrorism? I specifically debunked the post of Mo being all sweetness and light. Please do try and stay vaguely within the neighbourhood of the thread, sunshine, it might help you look less like a PC-blinded denier.
Part deux (or is that "duh"?):
"....The Bible is full of bloodthirsty extremism....." And please do point to the Christian extremists currently using that as an excuse to behead men of other faiths and keep their women as sex slaves? Oh, you can't - what a surprise, not!
@tidetide So much for your religion of peace. Straight from the Quran:
Quran (8:12) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them"
Quran (3:56) - "As to those who reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter, nor will they have anyone to help."
Quran (5:33) - "The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement"
... and so on. The Quran is riddled with hatred, violence and murder against everyone: Disbelievers, homosexuals, women to be treated as sex-slaves and so on. The Quran and Islam is sick and evil.
Not sure who said it but "Don't listen to what they say. Watch what they do."
[ISTR it applied to US Chriatian-Evangelical preachers, but it easily generalizes]
BTW Islamist != Islamic. A better label hasn't been found yet. Within the islamic world I'm told these sorts are called something that translates as "heretics", but neither the force of that term nor the context survive in the translation.
@Roo, I don't hate Muslims. I have contempt for Islam, which is responsible for so much hatred, violence and suppression of human rights in so many countries around the world. Also for the record I'm no fan of Christianity either, which is also responsible for so much hatred and division. Organised religion is poison however you look at it.
"All terrorists are muslims.
That's not a complete list of terrorist attacks because it excludes attacks that were not attributed to "Islamists", so you can not honestly draw the conclusion that "all terrorists are muslim" from that list.
"You were saying about it not being true???"
It's still not true just because you produced a Wikipedia list of "Islamist" terrorist attacks that excludes all attacks that were attributed to folks who aren't "Islamists".
You have a good point there. But let's not forget that the Old Testament does exactly the same. Please allow me to modify the last sentence in your post:
"The Ancient Testament is riddled with hatred, violence and murder against everyone: Disbelievers, homosexuals, women to be treated as sex-slaves and so on."
There are still 'Christian' sects and groups that completely abide the Old Testament.
Blessed are the drones for they bring forth the pink mist of justice.
Lets hope he enjoys the 72 virgins, what they didn't tell him is that they are all fat birds from Leeds.
I will be celebrating with a fucking massive bacon sandwich and a beer.
Lets hope they can know up a drone strike against the cockwombles at the Westboro Baptist Church next.
Who is this WE, who ARE NOT?
I hope that you can reassure us that none of your forebears was involved in fire bombing Tokyo, Dresden, Hamburg, etc, or carpet bombing the Iraq army, or napalming Vietnamese children, or gassing gypsies, etc., etc. How about in your lifetime? I've certainly paid taxes that have financed the killing of people from Belize, Oman, Iraq, Argentina, Northern Ireland and, no doubt, other places that I'm unaware of. How about you? Are you sure you're not a cruel murderous fucktard too? I don't like it but I find that I am nonetheless, mostly through complacency, inaction and selective attention.
> How about you? Are you sure you're not a cruel murderous fucktard too?
I am quite unsure about which way I'd have taken in Germany's darkest times. Out of sheer luck I was born later. All I can say is that I hope we (westernes) improve over time in putting human rights into first place. My optimism in this regard has not grown over time, though.
Yes we have many skeletons in the closet. As said in an earlier post I always have been critical about many aspects in our society.
It seems somewhat wasteful to use a hellfire to do this kind of thing.
Seriously - these missiles are more expensive than capture, criminal trial and life imprisonment.
Asymetric warfare at its finest. Expensive hardware vs cheap, replaceable fanatics.
"....these missiles are more expensive than capture, criminal trial and life imprisonment....." No, they are cheap compared to just the cost of the capture, let alone the cost of then trying and imprisoning such people. Each Hellfire fired in Afghanistan apparently cost the UK taxpayer $58k (I don't think that cost involves the expense of training drone pilots, shipping missiles or maintaining them but I may be wrong). Let's be generous and include the cost of the drone ($12.6m to the RAF for an MQ-9). But to mount a long-range mission into Syria with enough men to attack an insurgent base you'd probably need at least one HC2 Chinook ($28+m each to the RAF, before the costs of fuel, training, maintenance, etc., even more if you want a special forces HC3, as much moaned about by Lewis on this site - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/06/04/chinook_nao_distracts_from_real_helicopter_problems/), so you're already millions better off with the Hellfire option. And that's long before we count the cost of possible casualties with the capture option Nope, I'm far, far happier with the Hellfire option.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019