Topic: Barcelona: Van hits crowds on Ramblas tourist area

[SamAteTheRedAcid]

The tooth fairy is acceptable - religion has claimed so many lives and caused so many atrocities

One bit of my post that wasn't picked up on: what element of critical thought makes you snap out of believing in the tooth fairy

I dunno about you but my teeth stopped falling out after the first set was done

[Purple Red]

My point is that I see a vast difference between encouraging your child to support the same football team as you and manipulating an impressionable young mind into believing something for which there is no proof

There's no conclusive proof Everton are a football team either.

[Jake]

The government refers to it as Parental Rights and Responsibilities. The two (usually) go hand in hand. The poster you're replying to clearly hasn't thought this one through. If you take away a parent's right to raise their child, who do you give that right to? Not the church. Not the parent. Who? The State? Yes, the world needs more Totalitarianism. 

I don't know about parental responsibility? I'd argue that I do mate. I am a family lawyer after all (typing this in the office after a long day at Court...)

The Local Authority would step in if parents were subjecting the child to something that harms their development. I argue that exposing your child to a belief system based on some book written by man about a sky fairy is something that harms their development. Of course in practice that's not how it works, but you do often get cases where one parent (with or without Parental Responsibility [theres no such thing as Parental "rights"]) argues that a child should be brought up to believe, or not believe, in a certain faith system.

[۩ Imperator ۩]

Bit off topic here, lads.

[Jake]

True. Sorry guys.

[TepidT2O]

ISIS are trying to reclaim Spain from the inquisition

Islamic State has issued its first ever video in Spanish, threatening more terrorist attacks and vowing to reconquer al-Andalus for the “caliphate”.

Al-Andalus was the name given to the Iberian peninsula when it was ruled by Muslims for five centuries until their defeat and expulsion in 1492.

In the recording a militant, speaking in Spanish with an Arabic accent, says: “Allah willing, al-Andalus will become again what it was, part of the caliphate. Spanish Christians, don’t forget the Muslim blood spilt during the Spanish inquisition. We will take revenge for your massacre, the one you are carrying out now against Islamic State.”

Another man, whose face is hidden, adds: “Our war with you will continue until the world ends.” Spanish police identified the individual whose face can be seen as Muhammed Yasin Ahram Pérez, 22, from Cordoba in southern Spain. His Moroccan father is in jail in his native country for terrorism offences and his Spanish mother left Malaga in 2014 to live in an Isis-controlled area in Syria. The other man was named as Abu Salman al-Andalus.

As police investigated last week’s attacks in Catalonia, fresh questions were raised yesterday about how much they knew about the gang’s ringleader.


Abdelbaki Es Satty, 44, a radical imam, was based in Vilvoorde, a Belgian town that had been a European hub for Islamist extremism, between January and March last year. The Belgian authorities knew about him, and warned their Spanish counterparts, who apparently took no action when he returned to Spain.

Yesterday the family of the terrorist who drove into the crowd on Las Ramblas in Barcelona blamed police for not realising that Es Satty was a danger. Younes Abouyaaqoub, 22, the Moroccan who killed 13 people and injured 120 in Las Ramblas, was shot dead by police on Monday after a four-day Europe-wide police hunt.

His father, Omar Abouyaaqoub, whose other son Houssaine was also shot dead by police in the town of Cambrils, said that police should have been aware that Es Satty was a jihadist.

“How did they allow this imam? How could they not realise that he was a dangerous man?” El País newspaper reported him as saying. “It’s not our fault, how can someone blame us?”

Mr Abouyaaqoub said his family were unaware of the secret life his sons were leading. “We didn’t know anything about whether they met secretly in a van or a house. They have to disguise. They teach them. It’s part of what they do to them, to hide and hide what they think,” he said.

He said Younes was a “normal boy”. “He studied, earned a living, had a wage and did not get involved in problems.”

The family discovered their son had been involved in Spain’s worst terrorist atrocity for over a decade by watching the television reports.

[The Bournemouth Red]

ISIS are trying to reclaim Spain from the inquisition

They've got pretty long memories, this ISIS lot.

[TepidT2O]

They've got pretty long memories, this ISIS lot.

Yes, seems this is much more important to them than 'foreign wars'

[classycarra]

Yes, seems this is much more important to them than 'foreign wars'

Yes would love to hear the regressive left numpties' dissonance around this.

'Well, the reason Islamist terrorism exists in Europe is because the US are imperialists and trying to conquer the middle east for resources. Oh wait, the Islamists are saying they are attacking Spain in line with the imperialist expand and conquer history of Islam? Erm, yeah ignore them. It's racism that's caused this.'

[Purple Red]

Yes would love to hear the regressive left numpties' dissonance around this.

'Well, the reason Islamist terrorism exists in Europe is because the US are imperialists and trying to conquer the middle east for resources. Oh wait, the Islamists are saying they are attacking Spain in line with the imperialist expand and conquer history of Islam? Erm, yeah ignore them. It's racism that's caused this.'

I'm sure they'll have a way of blaming modern Spaniards for 16th century conflict that has nothing to do with them.

[zero zero]

Yes, seems this is much more important to them than 'foreign wars'

They told us that specifically after the Paris attacks; foreign policy is a secondary motive for the attacks.

[J_Kopite]

They told us that specifically after the Paris attacks; foreign policy is a secondary motive for the attacks.

Some people though, including someone in this thread, continue to display an utterly weird cognitive dissonance that leads them to ignore this.

[Antoine Lavoisier]

Bit off topic here, lads.

I don't think it is. In understanding why these attacks are happening, we must talk about it.

[So… Howard Philips]

ISIS are trying to reclaim Spain from the inquisition

Bring back El Cid, he'll show 'em.

[TepidT2O]

They told us that specifically after the Paris attacks; foreign policy is a secondary motive for the attacks.

Holy war being the most important factor... 

Madness, except they aren't mad they are deadly serious and deadly deluded....

[۩ Imperator ۩]

I don't think it is. In understanding why these attacks are happening, we must talk about it.

On the first page of the news forum, there is currently one thread about ISIS in Syria and a further thread about the wider context of terrorism. Virtually identical discussions to that above have been held cyclically in these topics after every similar event. It serves nobody to rehash it all again in this thread too, as anyone who now checks it looking for updates on the Barcelona attack can no longer find any relevant news because of all the off-topic stuff.

[zero zero]

Bit off topic here, lads.

Fair enough

I don't think it is. In understanding why these attacks are happening, we must talk about it.

I will reply to Le Jake, but in the Atheism thread.

[Antoine Lavoisier]

On the first page of the news forum, there is currently one thread about ISIS in Syria and a further thread about the wider context of terrorism. Virtually identical discussions to that above have been held cyclically in these topics after every similar event. It serves nobody to rehash it all again in this thread too, as anyone who now checks it looking for updates on the Barcelona attack can no longer find any relevant news because of all the off-topic stuff.

I'm sorry

[Antoine Lavoisier]

On the first page of the news forum, there is currently one thread about ISIS in Syria and a further thread about the wider context of terrorism. Virtually identical discussions to that above have been held cyclically in these topics after every similar event. It serves nobody to rehash it all again in this thread too, as anyone who now checks it looking for updates on the Barcelona attack can no longer find any relevant news because of all the off-topic stuff.

Really??

[Millie]

Really??

Yes really

[TepidT2O]

I did post a news update yesterday folks....

[۩ Imperator ۩]

I did post a news update yesterday folks....

Yup. And it was interesting and relevant. Thanks.

[TravisBickle]

They told us that specifically after the Paris attacks; foreign policy is a secondary motive for the attacks.

 Foreign policy is no motive whatsoever. The problem is the ideology. Go back to the Satanic Verses affair and everything that has happened since and you can only conclude the problem is a specific fascistic religious ideology. Nothing else.

[ToneLa]

I blame murdering nutcases personally

[zero zero]

Foreign policy is no motive whatsoever. The problem is the ideology. Go back to the Satanic Verses affair and everything that has happened since and you can only conclude the problem is a specific fascistic religious ideology. Nothing else.

I think the (mostly) young men that carry out these cowardly attacks are in the throes of an identity crisis, sometime before they latch onto a fascist suicide cult.

[J_Kopite]

I blame murdering nutcases personally

You must be naive or not want to ask difficult questions then.

[ToneLa]

You must be naive or not want to ask difficult questions then.

So you'd class the Barcelona murderers as sane?

OK.erm... Why?

Look, if you want to have a go at me personally just PM me. Otherwise keep it on topic and explain your points, yeah?   

[TepidT2O]

So you'd class the Barcelona murderers as sane?

OK.erm... Why?

Look, if you want to have a go at me personally just PM me. Otherwise keep it on topic and explain your points, yeah?   

Of all the Islamic terrorists who have been caught alive, there has never been any doubt as to their sanity.

These aren't insane people, it would be much easier to understand if they were... no, they have a twisted sense of logic, but are utterly sane.

[ToneLa]

Of all the Islamic terrorists who have been caught alive, there has never been any doubt as to their sanity.

These aren't insane people, it would be much easier to understand if they were... no, they have a twisted sense of logic, but are utterly sane.

Thanks for a reasonable reply 

Perhaps our senses of twisted logic vs sane is an interesting point. How far do you have to go before it qualifies as the other?

I do personally count these actions as insane as I've worked in mental health: I'm familiar with the area: I know what I classify as rational / sane

Without getting into semantics, I do think anyone conducting such an attack is basically broken.

I don't think understanding is on the cards really. My definition of insane basically revolves around being so far beyond common logic as to be unpalatable.

After all there are serial killers who saw a great logic in what they did!

I suppose the difficult thing now is... How twisted can your logic get before you're considered insane?

My own sad interaction with the severely mentally ill has shown me self-identification is not a trait of dangerous, mentally troubled people. Maybe I am trying to qualify it too much in those terms...

But I do think it's worth drawing the line around the mental states involved. Even if you look at the religious aspect, there's a difference between peaceful religious folk of a similar faith and the perpetrators of this horrific attack on Barcelona.

I personally think understanding is the first step to dealing with any problem. What would we diagnose these murderers with?

I'm sure "murderers" alone is quite a charged word. Yeah, I'm sticking my own judgement on that... But to me, couching the actions even in mental health don't change that definition in law.

[TepidT2O]

Andreas Bretvik (or what ever his name is)!killed many for some odd cause and he too was declared utterly sane.

They have been able to rationalise their slaughter, their brutality and even the cowardice of their deaths....

Something like a mass hypnotism or twisted reality.  It's rather similar to that experienced by those in cults ...

[ToneLa]

That's an interesting case Tepid as I was personally aghast his actions were sane.

Him being declared sane disturbs me. 

I might be relying on my mental health background but how would others describe him?

I personally see Evil as something done with intent, or action so bad it counts.

To me, the choosing of such an odd cause to the point you inflict death ("murder") implies a lack of rationality

 I'm interested what 'utterly sane' means. I don't think it means anything within mental health - I'm no expert especially when you bring foreign countries in it, but we define such things based on deviation.

We are granted sanity - it is classified by deviation.

Eg, law abiding is a concept in our culture.

What's non law abiding? The lack of adherence.

 What's 'utterly law abiding'? 

What I'm getting at is UTTERLY SANE implies an adherence to sanity. What this fella did, to me at any rate... Did not satisfy any definition of 'sanity' I am aware of.

I therefore need to call bullshit on that.

  I'm a bit sad what I'm saying here just muddies the waters and doesn't promote understanding. Pointing out flaws in our systems doesn't always resolve them for us.

I suppose I just want to slap a proper definition on this.

  I think that's all any of us want to do. Sometimes classification is is understanding...

I'd like the understanding of the people who committed such an attack in Barcelona classified as 'not normal'.

Has there been any court / legal ruling on that yet?

I am a bit loathe to toss around terms like 'nutcase' but for me it shows a compete non-adherence to society / adherence to its values but I think we lack a complete word as I wouldn't say that in the mental health role I had.

I suppose I'm looking for answers on what those definitions could otherwise be.

.. Without resorting to four letter words, though I won't disagree with any 

[TepidT2O]

I would say he's psycopathic, but that's not the same as being in sane..

Actually, I'm not sure he's a very good comparison in many ways, he was always an extremists.  Many of these bombers and murders were pretty average Joes.  Very normal in almost every way.

Usually from fairly secular Muslim families, usually reasonably well educated.  But they had been indoctrinated to believe it's ok to do this.  There are thousands of ISIS supporters in Iraq and Syria who would do the same, they certainly aren't all insane (or whatever the correct terminology is) but they are all indoctrinated....


.

[ToneLa]

I would say he's psycopathic, but that's not the same as being in sane..

Well. Psychopaths are classified by a mental disorder which is as I say a deviation from... Basically sanity. Dis meaning deviation, or disruption, or non-

Insane is maybe too strong, but basically - I do think "normal" is quite a poor term for anything, but there's a reason we qualify sociopathy and psychopathy as "disorders" (literally meaning Not in Order)

Actually, I'm not sure he's a very good comparison in many ways, he was always an extremists.  Many of these bombers and murders were pretty average Joes.  Very normal in almost every way.

Usually from fairly secular Muslim families, usually reasonably well educated.  But they had been indoctrinated to believe it's ok to do this.  There are thousands of ISIS supporters in Iraq and Syria who would do the same, they certainly aren't all insane (or whatever the correct terminology is) but they are all indoctrinated....

 
I'd agree he's not the best comparison. I'd like to look at such people on individual terms.

I think it's going to be larger than my experience what, exactly, you'd qualify ISIS etc as.

All. I'm positing is.. Whatever term for "not mentally sound" you'd like.

I don't have a word for it, I really don't, there are reasons such people fall for such shocking untruths and you and I do not. Almost all labels I can come up with are in some way judgemental. But they brought that upon themselves.

I suppose I'd happily swap "nutcase murderer" out for a better term. What's the term especially if we can't choose "insane"?

It isn't "normal" unless we are "supernormal"

I don't like labels for groups, really

I am surprised I felt jumped on.. Not by you, Tepid.. For saying something I've at least rationalised here.

I think as a society we are searching for a better definition of what drives such atrocities.

I think many would agree we don't share the traits required behind the actions. What scares many also, is a certain set of extreme experiences may drive someone to cross that line.

I don't have answers really. I'm just justifying my use of the term "murdering nutcases". I'm open to other definitions being used. I'll cop to that term being insensitive even, but this is an emotive subject and I hope people can understand the sense and area it points at.

[Zeb]

There was a long thread on this after the Manchester bombing if you dig back on here ToneLa. Loads of useful links to studies and essays on what is behind this sort of terrorism and some thought out responses and discussion about them. [edit: there's a mix in the thread, as it ranges widely.] But majority of people on MI5's watch list have no hint of a mental disorder or illness. Which isn't saying 'this is normal behaviour', but looking towards mental health stuff for an explanation is kind of understandable but it's not really supported by the evidence. Evil isn't always something other. Sometimes it's a learned behaviour.

[ToneLa]

Is there a classification you can replace my disparagement of their mental health with?

Evil is a good definition to toss around but no easier to define than what I said 

I'm all too familiar with the Manchester bombings, and while I've been sort of gunshy over my opinions going on RAWK if I'm going to posit something like 'people who commit atrocities are not mentally sound', if rubbished I would, personally, like a replacement concept for them 

On the MI5 front, there isn't an official classification of terror suspects, it seems largely based on trends and analysis of habits / actions  - and this might overlap with how learned behaviour grows into trends in adulthood...

If I drop the term disorder and replace it with "aberration" it perhaps removes a stigma and frames it in terms of trends. That is something in criminology which has depth and trends I'm aware of,  classification is basically within where that realm enters (law) and does reinforce the concept of being able to classify the perpetrators here.

Indeed, "criminals" is one such definition with fairly strict terms. This always leads to definitions, is my point 

  The recent terror attacks in Europe - even beyond Barca -  have in common such trends as domestic abuse.

I'm isolating that as it's an area you couldn't put under "mentally ill" but perhaps law , but is also a genuine signifier of... What? Let's put in propensity for violence, but the link is there. I won't posit "criminality" as a common trend but I think there are certainly common elements.

Here's my issue beyond the obvious problem of wanting to see sense in such an attack, and having a background / mentality that wishes to spot trends (I'll concede that's idealist and even if unreasonable its a common technique in law and criminology in terms of classification and overall - the usefulness of such traits if spotted and foremost, true)

I'm not pretending to be an expert. I am wondering..

1) I said I understand terrorism as generally not mentally sound, in admittedly uncouth terms, it's a woolly area but I think there are trends to spot - I don't think this is a complete area, fine to concede even if that would actually be worse 

2) I was called "naive and afraid of difficult questions" which I really don't see in my own thinking. Indeed, the most difficult element of this is its a random, nonsensical attack which is beyond prevention. Er... Am I missing something to warrant such criticism? Why not just tell me what it is...?

With 1) I do see room for extrapolation and I by no means limit the definition to my own area of experience and knowledge

Without 2) I think I've at least demonstrated my own thinking and indeed, I do agree with you Zeb,  I think what I've brought to the table here is robust if not complete - I'm looking at it on an individual and causational level, and three posts in a thread to me doesn't suggest I'm stopping anything further 

If I'm naive and afraid, what should I be thinking...?

  that's a bit rhetorical. I think any of us would like to explain this. I doubt that's currently possible.

[Zeb]

Just pointing you to a thread mate which covers a lot of the ground you're questioning, although it does meander a bit over 30 pages I know. Whether you agree with some of the ideas presented or not, well, there's the debate isn't it? I said my piece on that thread so not really going to rehash it again over several threads. I come at it from studies in cult thinking, totalitarian mindsets ('how does the local doctor get into industrial mass murder?'), stuff like that, where taking a step back into the social factors is often more fruitful than trying to diagnose millions of people individually.

[ToneLa]

That's sound mate, I'll give it a peruse tomorrow as the sad thing about this discussion is we have had cause to pore over it before!

I would like to say I'm not trying to diagnose millions of people - I'm not equating anyone to the people behind this:I am trying to fit the people behind this into my own understanding, some of which are systems and names and classifications.

I think that's all any of us are trying to do. 

Cheers for the link, I do appreciate if I have to catch up a bit!

[Zeb]

Appreciate that we're all asking questions without answers here, ToneLa. Certainly not knocking you mate. Should clarify too the 'diagnose millions of people' comment is more about how entire groups of people (societies/nations) behave in a way which is objectively evil. Even if (subjectively) they feel they're doing good. Or the Lord's work. Or.. well, you see the connection there for where I'm coming from looking at this.

Anyways, look after yourself.

[ToneLa]

Yeah that makes total sense mate. I don't know if my own hippy sensibilities chime... But I do myself class certain acts as objectively evil and I think many acts of evil are justified in the mind of those who do it - even if those who have understand it is quite a worryingly large group.

You take care too mate. It's late! I'm dead glad to live in a society where we can toss around such concepts 

T
X