Terror attacks in Paris.

[Outrider]

Another word being thrown about is Solidarity, Solidarity with who, over the past couple of days I have heard many ordinary Muslims protesting, not in my name, they are as disgusted as you and me over the atrocities.

Where does my solidarity lie.

Solidarity with anyone, in the short term, who is prepared to endorse a secular, peacable, 'live and let live' approach, I'd think, pretty much like mine.

Not from what I have read, they will cut the tongue out of anyone using the word Daesh.

And there are a number of reasons for that, not least is the fact that they want to be seen to be 'the face of Islam'.

But why fan the flames of Islamaphobia, because that is definitely what they want.

On the one hand we do need to be ensuring that they aren't painting the entire picture of what Islam is, but on the other hand we can't deny the reality that they are an Islamic sect, that what they are doing is inspired, at least in a large part, by their religious view and their take on that religion's texts.

Isis aren't all of Islam, but at the same time Islam isn't an irrelevant concept in this issue.

O.

[Gonnagle]

Dear Prof,

You aren't going to quench islamophobia through dishonesty. The honest view is to accept first that ISIS are muslims and are motivated by their interpretation of islamic teaching, but also to recognise and reiterate time after time that most muslims do not accept their interpretation of islam and certainly completely and utterly reject their methods.

Fair enough, but as I have stated, on this forum we have some fine minds which actually think deeply about the subject, out there in the big bad world we have a public who are bombarded with soundbites, they don't see the political or the profit, they see the word Islam.

But then again maybe I am not giving Joe public its due.

Anyway that big bad world beckons me, and yes I hate shopping.

Gonnagle.

[ProfessorDavey]

Dear Prof,

Fair enough, but as I have stated, on this forum we have some fine minds which actually think deeply about the subject, out there in the big bad world we have a public who are bombarded with soundbites, they don't see the political or the profit, they see the word Islam.

But then again maybe I am not giving Joe public its due.

Anyway that big bad world beckons me, and yes I hate shopping.

Gonnagle.

The best way to deal with this isn't to pretend that ISIS aren't islamic and muslims - the public aren't daft. Rather to recognise that there is a battle within islam on ideology and therefore to encourage the groupings to be moderates (whether muslim or not) vs the extremists, rather than muslims vs the rest. But to do this will require the muslim community to recognise that ISIS extremists are muslims and often have come from their communities - and once they get beyond the 'I can't believe he would go on to be an extremist, he seemed like a ordinary, normal muslim', kind of denial and look really hard at what may be occurring in plain sight in those communities that may act to support radicalisation, or perhaps more reasonably to fail to prevent it.

[Nearly Sane]

Good old Prof D, seeing into the mind of  any Muslim who is a bit shocked about someone they might know becoming radicalised to kill people, and being able to pronounce they are in denial.

[ProfessorDavey]

Good old Prof D, seeing into the mind of  any Muslim who is a bit shocked about someone they might know becoming radicalised to kill people, and being able to pronounce they are in denial.

And your level of understanding of the issues is exactly? How closely are you linked to any of these communities in your personal or professional life?

And I am not the only person to think this - and someone else recently espousing a similar view is Sadiq Khan, who I would think has a pretty good insight into muslim communities, being from one of those communities himself and also having worked very closely with the broader muslim community particularly in London.

[Nearly Sane]

And your level of understanding of the issues is exactly? How closely are you linked to any of these communities in your personal or professional life?

And I am not the only person to think this - and someone else recently espousing a similar view is Sadiq Khan, who I would think has a pretty good insight into muslim communities, being from one of those communities himself and also having worked very closely with the broader muslim community particularly in London.

I think expecting people to see the big picture at times like that and judge them, all of them, people you don't know as being in denial is a ridiculous place of posturing.


I don't know what Sadiq Khan has specifically said but iif he did phrase it in the patronising and judgmental way you did about individuals he win't know either then he's being as silly in his estimates of individuals as you are.

[ProfessorDavey]

I think expecting people to see the big picture at times like that and judge them, all of them, people you don't know as being in denial is a ridiculous place of posturing.


I don't know what Sadiq Khan has specifically said but iif he did phrase it in the patronising and judgmental way you did about individuals he win't know either then he's being as silly in his estimates of individuals as you are.

I ask again:

'And your level of understanding of the issues is exactly? How closely are you linked to any of these communities in your personal or professional life?'

Any chance of answering please.

[Nearly Sane]

I ask again:

'And your level of understanding of the issues is exactly? How closely are you linked to any of these communities in your personal or professional life?'

Any chance of answering please.

No, because rather as with Bashful's appeal to his own authority earlier this week, it is essentially irrelevant. If we merely want to dictate discussion on the basis you want to go down, it will entirely defeat the point of the forum.


Whenever you feel capable of justifying your point rather attempt to go down this irrelevance, get back to me. If not I will leave you to patting yourself on the back.

[ProfessorDavey]

No, because rather as with Bashful's appeal to his own authority earlier this week, it is essentially irrelevant. If we merely want to dictate discussion on the basis you want to go down, it will entirely defeat the point of the forum.

Classic obfuscation tactic. It is entirely relevant, given that proximity to dealing with some of these issues provides a level of understanding of the situation. I am asking about your understanding and proximities to muslim communities and requirement to deal with the issues of radicalisation and extremism. I suspect by your refusal to answer the reality is 'none' in your case. That isn't the same in my case.

Whenever you feel capable of justifying your point rather attempt to go down this irrelevance, get back to me. If not I will leave you to patting yourself on the back.

My comment was based on any number of comments from members of the relevant communities (whether recently in Paris, or in London e.g. in relation to young men and women travelling to Syria to join ISIS) when they became aware that a member of their community, usually a person they knew personally, had become radicalised in this manner. These aren't my comments, but come from the communities themselves.

I fully accept that I may have 'paraphrased' rather than used real quotes, but the meaning is pretty similar. So here are some direct quotes of the type, in this case from the father of one of the schoolgirls from Bethnal Green:

'Mr Abase said that Amira has been behaving in a "normal way" when he last saw her.

He said: "She said 'daddy, I'm in a hurry.

"There was no sign to suspect her at all."

Speaking at Scotland Yard's headquarters, Mr Abase said his daughter had not mentioned Syria or politics to her family.

However he said that he did not know if she had spoken about the topics with friends.

He added: "She doesn't dare discuss something like this with us. She knows what the answer would be."'

Or a remarkably similar comment from a neighbour who grew up with one of the Paris attackers:

'"He was not an angry kid," Sheikh Mohammed told the BBC. "He was not something, someone bad, I don't know what happened. When I saw his picture I was like, 'What? Really? This guy?'"'

[wigginhall]

But surely some families say that they had no idea about their son's or daugher's radicalization.   It doesn't happen in the mosque or in the family, and parents are often bewildered.

Since the Syrian civil war began four years ago, some 20,000 foreign nationals have made their way to Syria and Iraq to fight for various radical Islamist factions. Over 3,000 are from Western countries. While some go with their families’ blessing, most leave in secret, taking all sense of normalcy with them. After they’ve gone, their parents are left with a form of grief that is surreal in its specificity. It is sorrow at the loss of a child, it is guilt at what he or she may have done, it is shame in the face of hostility from friends and neighbors, and it is doubt about all the things they realize they did not know about the person whom they brought into the world.

http://highline.huffingtonpost.com/articles/en/mothers-of-isis/

[ProfessorDavey]

But surely some families say that they had no idea about their son's or daugher's radicalization.   It doesn't happen in the mosque or in the family, and parents are often bewildered.
 

http://highline.huffingtonpost.com/articles/en/mothers-of-isis/

Which is exactly my point - and the same point as that being made by Sadiq Khan.

Radicalisation is happening in many of these communities, and those communities need to recognise that fact because only if they are fully recognising of what may be happening in 'plain sight' are those communities going to be better able to identify those at risk, those actually in the process and help to stop it.

Report from the comments of Sadiq Khan:

'Sadiq Khan today called on his fellow Muslims not to “bury our heads in the sand” over the scale of extremism in the UK — and to do more to root out radicalisation.'

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/mayor/sadiq-uk-muslims-must-do-more-to-root-out-cancer-of-extremism-a3118801.html

[wigginhall]

Which is exactly my point - and the same point as that being made by Sadiq Khan.

Radicalisation is happening in many of these communities, and those communities need to recognise that fact because only if they are fully recognising of what my be happening in 'plain sight' are those communities going to be better able to identify those at risk, those actually in the process and help to stop it.

Report from the comments of Sadiq Khan:

'Sadiq Khan today called on his fellow Muslims not to “bury our heads in the sand” over the scale of extremism in the UK — and to do more to root out radicalisation.'

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/mayor/sadiq-uk-muslims-must-do-more-to-root-out-cancer-of-extremism-a3118801.html

I thought the point is that it's not happening in plain sight at all.   I don't understand the idea of denial - what does that mean?  Denial means that you are aware of it.     

[Udayana]

But surely some families say that they had no idea about their son's or daugher's radicalization.   It doesn't happen in the mosque or in the family, and parents are often bewildered.
 

http://highline.huffingtonpost.com/articles/en/mothers-of-isis/

I can understand that, as many of the terrorists have only had their "extremist Muslim" views for a very short period. Eg the Paris terrorists who a few weeks previously were running a bar in Brussels  or the woman,  Hasna Aitboulahcen, who blew herself up in the raid and was reported as not even religious.

i.e. In general, they are not very religious and have not lived devout or even observant lives but something or someone must make them change their mindset.

[Nearly Sane]

So actually Sadiq Khan isn't saying the same thing at all. He isn't saying that any individual who states they do not understand how someone they knew became radicalized is in denial. He isn't really talking about those individuals at all. How odd to cite something that doesn't back oneself up.

[wigginhall]

I can understand that, as many of the terrorists have only had their "extremist Muslim" views for a very short period. Eg the Paris terrorists who a few weeks previously were running a bar in Brussels  or the woman,  Hasna Aitboulahcen, who blew herself up in the raid and was reported as not even religious.

i.e. In general, they are not very religious and have not lived devout or even observant lives but something or someone must make them change their mindset.

It seems difficult to generalize.  There are kids who suddenly seem to go off to Syria, with no warning, and others, who had become more religious.   But some people argue that Muslims must know where it's going on, and do nothing - this is just another form of bigotry. 

[ProfessorDavey]

So actually Sadiq Khan isn't saying the same thing at all. He isn't saying that any individual who states they do not understand how someone they knew became radicalized is in denial. He isn't really talking about those individuals at all. How odd to cite something that doesn't back oneself up.

Really?

'Sadiq Khan today called on his fellow Muslims not to “bury our heads in the sand” over the scale of extremism in the UK'

Isn't bury your head in the sand a different way to talk about denial. Both mean (in this context) refusal to confront or acknowledge a problem.

[ProfessorDavey]

I can understand that, as many of the terrorists have only had their "extremist Muslim" views for a very short period. Eg the Paris terrorists who a few weeks previously were running a bar in Brussels  or the woman,  Hasna Aitboulahcen, who blew herself up in the raid and was reported as not even religious.

i.e. In general, they are not very religious and have not lived devout or even observant lives but something or someone must make them change their mindset.

I don't think you can conclude that merely because someone was outwardly running a bar that they weren't at the same time becoming increasingly radicalised. There may have not been outward signs, but that doesn't mean it wasn't happening. Apparently Hasna Aitboulahcen was described by her brother as being 'permanently on her phone, looking at Facebook or WhatsApp'. Given that social media is often used extensively in the radicalisation process, this doesn't mean she wasn't in the process of being radicalised - it is quite possible that her obsession with social media was part of the process.

[Nearly Sane]

Really?

'Sadiq Khan today called on his fellow Muslims not to “bury our heads in the sand” over the scale of extremism in the UK'

Isn't bury your head in the sand a different way to talk about denial. Both mean (in this context) refusal to confront or acknowledge a problem.

Which is why in my post I didn't say anything about the difference between burry head in sand and denial.


But rather, to repeat myself, he isn't talking about the individual who might express confusion over someone they know becoming radicalized as being in denial/burying their head in the sand.

[ProfessorDavey]

Which is why in my post I didn't say anything about the difference between burry head in sand and denial.


But rather, to repeat myself, he isn't talking about the individual who might express confusion over someone they know becoming radicalized as being in denial/burying their head in the sand.

In what way wouldn't that individual classify as one of Sadiq Khan's 'fellow Muslims' (his term not mine). He doesn't specify and particular individual because he was addressing all members of the Muslim community, which of course includes the people I referred to and yet somehow in your mind they aren't included in the people Sadiq was addressing.

Any chance of responding to my earlier question please. Evasion and obfuscation aren't pretty traits you know.

[Nearly Sane]

In what way wouldn't that individual classify as one of Sadiq Khan's 'fellow Muslims' (his term not mine). He doesn't specify and particular individual because he was addressing all members of the Muslim community, which of course includes the people I referred to and yet somehow in your mind they aren't included in the people Sadiq was addressing.

Any chance of responding to my earlier question please. Evasion and obfuscation aren't pretty traits you know.

The difference is in the generaluzation, he is talking about the community as awhile, not specific individuals as you were doing this, this changes the meaning.
To illustrate Sadiq Khan might also say 'The Labour party should stop with the backstabbing or else it will be history' . This is different from someone saying, 's my individual who expresses any reservations about Jeremy Corbyn is a vicious traitor'

I am not evading the question, I explained why I think it is irrelevant. Kindly do not misrepresent me.

[Udayana]

I don't think you can conclude that merely because someone was outwardly running a bar that they weren't at the same time becoming increasingly radicalised. There may have not been outward signs, but that doesn't mean it wasn't happening. Apparently Hasna Aitboulahcen was described by her brother as being 'permanently on her phone, looking at Facebook or WhatsApp'. Given that social media is often used extensively in the radicalisation process, this doesn't mean she wasn't in the process of being radicalised - it is quite possible that her obsession with social media was part of the process.

Indeed, they may be "being radicalized", but it just shows how difficult it is for those around them to see it.

Which young adults aren't permanently on their smartphones or social media? Also, if the parents have only taken religion casually, and the youngsters have not paid it any special attention, how will they recognize that their children are being radicalized?

[Rhiannon]

We've seen that women can be persuaded to abuse children because they fall under the spell of men they meet through social media. Could this be something similar?

[torridon]

It is common that people can be persuaded into dysfunctional behaviours merely by an authority figure; see Milgram; here, a piece on whether evil is a pathology :

https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22830471-000-syndrome-e-can-neuroscience-explain-the-executioners-of-isis/?cmpid=ILC|NSNS|2015-webpush-syndromee&utm_medium=ILC&utm_source=NSNS&utm_campaign=webpush&utm_content=syndromee

[jeremyp]

From what I have heard over the last couple of days and as I stated in my last post, the overwhelming feeling I got from the audience ( Muslim and non Muslim ) on Question Time, these monsters are so far removed from Islam that they don't deserve the name.

OK two things here.

1. Do not call them monsters. They are not monsters, they are people. Calling them monsters is just a way of avoiding the horrible truth about what human beings are capable of if not handled correctly.
2. They are not far removed from Islam. They are Muslims. The main difference between them and the vast majority of Muslims is in their attitude to people who disagree with them on matters of religion.

[BashfulAnthony]

OK two things here.

1. Do not call them monsters. They are not monsters, they are people. Calling them monsters is just a way of avoiding the horrible truth about what human beings are capable of if not handled correctly.
2. They are not far removed from Islam. They are Muslims. The main difference between them and the vast majority of Muslims is in their attitude to people who disagree with them on matters of religion.

Well, just say, they behaved monstrously, then.

You are totally wrong to say the above: the difference between them and the majority of Muslims is that they have totally mis-represented what the Qu'Ran is saying.