A charity man there to help people, most of whom were Muslim and travelling with a Muslim convoy.
This simply proves to me these people are just a bunch os psychopaths hiding behind a sham they call Islam.
May AH rest in peace, maybe by travelling to the country he chose to put himself in harms way but this is appealing and I feel terribly for his poor family who's hope must have started to rise with the wide Muslim support an inaction by IS for 3 weeks or so.
Sadly the journalist will follow and anyone that has seen the video by his dad today cannot but be moved.
I just can not understand how they could kill a man who was helping their fellow muslims. He left his family, to provide aid and comfort to muslims in times of trouble, and this is how they who claim to be loyal muslims repay him. Not only does it do them no good, it also causes further harm to muslims in the region because any other aid workers will now think twice about going over there, thus denying those in need of help! May i also say that i think they are w***ers!! RIP Alan Henning
Kev, muslims are quite happy killing each other, killing a kaffir means fuck all to them. If I hear `islam is the religion of peace' again .........
They plan these barbaric acts very carefully and they are not Muslims, they are evil murdering thugs who are trying to terrify anyone who disagrees with their pathological viewpoint.
Just claiming to be something does not mean you really are a member of the group. I understand the point you make GH , but I just happen to disagree with you.
There most certainly is misrepresentation. The approx 1.6 billion Muslims that the caliphate would encompass, under Islamic jurisprudence, the appointment of a caliph needs a general consensus. Without it, as is the case here, sedition is said to have taken place, so yes I would very much argue that the term 'Islamic State' is open to 'misrepresentation'.
Meanwhile I was reading earlier that the US has redefined how they classify civilian deaths in drone strikes - if anyone is near a target then they're assumed to be an enemy -
" if they kill a so-called "jackpot," the target that they’re aiming for, and they kill other unknown individuals, the system that the Obama administration, the U.S. military and CIA have developed is that anyone who is an EKIA, enemy killed in action, is someone who we don’t have proof that they’re innocent. In other words, it’s sort of a reversal of the idea that you’re innocent until proven guilty. If you are near someone that the U.S. was intending to kill, the presumption is that you are an EKIA, you’re an enemy killed in action—unless someone can prove that you weren’t. "
When we read about a lack of civilian casualties it doesn't actually necessarily mean that.
Additionally I read the other day the transcript of an interview with a drone operator who said that quite often they can see people crawling out of the wreckage missing body parts and being left to bleed to death. Is that really a more civilised way for an innocent person to die than being beheaded?
I'm not for a second in anyway trying to suggest that ISIS are anything but a warped, psychopathic group hellbent on causing as much pain and atrocities to shock the West as they can, but at the same time when our press make so much of the beheadings but fail to question our role in murdering civilians over there at the same time, it does frustrate me that as ever we only see one side of the story and my faith in the media diminishes even further.
Also to the comments re: Islamic state etc. Interesting article here about how many of the military leaders within ISIS are ex-Baath party members who are using ISIS to continue to fight the war that was started with the original invasion 10 years ago, so not necessarily involved for purely ideological reasons.
There most certainly is misrepresentation. The approx 1.6 billion Muslims that the caliphate would encompass, under Islamic jurisprudence, the appointment of a caliph needs a general consensus. Without it, as is the case here, sedition is said to have taken place, so yes I would very much argue that the term 'Islamic State' is open to 'misrepresentation'.
There are plenty of Muslim states that use capital punishment and exercise the death penalty for religious crimes such as blasphemy or apostasy, usually sentenced in kangaroo courts where the defendant has little chance of escaping the penalty. As someone else has pointed out, Saudi Arabia has beheaded far more people than IS. The only difference is that IS don't sit in the UN. It doesn't excuse the fact that IS are kidnapping and brutally executing hostages, but the fact is the West has been more than happy to tolerate the Middle East's fetish for medieval torture. Fair play to Westerners who do genuinely care about those suffering in the Middle East and do try to help, they are the only decent human beings involved in this entire debacle.
I just can not understand how they could kill a man who was helping their fellow muslims. He left his family, to provide aid and comfort to muslims in times of trouble, and this is how they who claim to be loyal muslims repay him. Not only does it do them no good, it also causes further harm to muslims in the region because any other aid workers will now think twice about going over there, thus denying those in need of help! May i also say that i think they are w***ers!! RIP Alan Henning
Kev, muslims are quite happy killing each other, killing a kaffir means fuck all to them. If I hear `islam is the religion of peace' again .........
Sorry but you are wrong. You cannot tarnish everyone with the same brush, in the same way not everyone living on benefits is a a scrounger, not every immigrant is in the UK here to live off the state, not every Muslim wants to murder everyone else.
I just can not understand how they could kill a man who was helping their fellow muslims. He left his family, to provide aid and comfort to muslims in times of trouble, and this is how they who claim to be loyal muslims repay him. Not only does it do them no good, it also causes further harm to muslims in the region because any other aid workers will now think twice about going over there, thus denying those in need of help! May i also say that i think they are w***ers!! RIP Alan Henning
Kev, muslims are quite happy killing each other, killing a kaffir means fuck all to them. If I hear `islam is the religion of peace' again .........
Sorry but you are wrong. You cannot tarnish everyone with the same brush, in the same way not everyone living on benefits is a a scrounger, not every immigrant is in the UK here to live off the state, not every Muslim wants to murder everyone else.
but I never said `all', I said they are quite happy killing each other. As someone else mentioned there are 1.8 billion muslims in the world surely they are capable of dealing with the 20/3000 IS or do they lack the will?
Meanwhile I was reading earlier that the US has redefined how they classify civilian deaths in drone strikes - if anyone is near a target then they're assumed to be an enemy -
" if they kill a so-called "jackpot," the target that they’re aiming for, and they kill other unknown individuals, the system that the Obama administration, the U.S. military and CIA have developed is that anyone who is an EKIA, enemy killed in action, is someone who we don’t have proof that they’re innocent. In other words, it’s sort of a reversal of the idea that you’re innocent until proven guilty. If you are near someone that the U.S. was intending to kill, the presumption is that you are an EKIA, you’re an enemy killed in action—unless someone can prove that you weren’t. "
When we read about a lack of civilian casualties it doesn't actually necessarily mean that.
Additionally I read the other day the transcript of an interview with a drone operator who said that quite often they can see people crawling out of the wreckage missing body parts and being left to bleed to death. Is that really a more civilised way for an innocent person to die than being beheaded?
I'm not for a second in anyway trying to suggest that ISIS are anything but a warped, psychopathic group hellbent on causing as much pain and atrocities to shock the West as they can, but at the same time when our press make so much of the beheadings but fail to question our role in murdering civilians over there at the same time, it does frustrate me that as ever we only see one side of the story and my faith in the media diminishes even further.
RIP Alan Henning
Of course without our intervention it was a land of peace and plenty and happiness!
ISIL are comitting genocide against whole populations and have committed a huge range of large scale and shocking human rights abuses according to the UN. They pose a real strategic threat to an entire area of immense sensitivity and there are a number of highly unstable highly armed countries which could get dragged in.
This is the single largest movement of refugees since the end of WW2 and the partition of India. I think that on balance the possible small scale collateral killing of civialians pales in to absolute insignificance compared to what has been done to the population of these countries in the last three years.
How dare you suggest the actions of our armed forces are murder and in in any way similar to coldly beheading someone with a small knife! He was not even a combatant, but a peaceful big hearted man trying to do some good in the world.
I just can not understand how they could kill a man who was helping their fellow muslims. He left his family, to provide aid and comfort to muslims in times of trouble, and this is how they who claim to be loyal muslims repay him. Not only does it do them no good, it also causes further harm to muslims in the region because any other aid workers will now think twice about going over there, thus denying those in need of help! May i also say that i think they are w***ers!! RIP Alan Henning
Kev, muslims are quite happy killing each other, killing a kaffir means fuck all to them. If I hear `islam is the religion of peace' again .........
Sorry but you are wrong. You cannot tarnish everyone with the same brush, in the same way not everyone living on benefits is a a scrounger, not every immigrant is in the UK here to live off the state, not every Muslim wants to murder everyone else.
but I never said `all', I said they are quite happy killing each other. As someone else mentioned there are 1.8 billion muslims in the world surely they are capable of dealing with the 20/3000 IS or do they lack the will?
But, on the face of it at least, there does seem to be a lot more of the Islamic nations looking to fight the threat of IS, for example Syria, Iran, Lebanon, Jordan, Saudi Arabia.
I just can not understand how they could kill a man who was helping their fellow muslims. He left his family, to provide aid and comfort to muslims in times of trouble, and this is how they who claim to be loyal muslims repay him. Not only does it do them no good, it also causes further harm to muslims in the region because any other aid workers will now think twice about going over there, thus denying those in need of help! May i also say that i think they are w***ers!! RIP Alan Henning
Kev, muslims are quite happy killing each other, killing a kaffir means fuck all to them. If I hear `islam is the religion of peace' again .........
Sorry but you are wrong. You cannot tarnish everyone with the same brush, in the same way not everyone living on benefits is a a scrounger, not every immigrant is in the UK here to live off the state, not every Muslim wants to murder everyone else.
but I never said `all', I said they are quite happy killing each other. As someone else mentioned there are 1.8 billion muslims in the world surely they are capable of dealing with the 20/3000 IS or do they lack the will?
But, on the face of it at least, there does seem to be a lot more of the Islamic nations looking to fight the threat of IS, for example Syria, Iran, Lebanon, Jordan, Saudi Arabia.
The key words there are `seem' and `looking'. Only Iran, Jordan and Saudi Arabia have the military capability, Iran won't let in to Iraq and Saudi Arabia and Jordan seem to be doing not much at all.
And that's why I specifically used those words. Surely though it at least gives an indication to how serious these countries are taking IS now. With the seeming ease they have swept across nearly two countries now you can sort of understand the reluctance of the likes of Turkey wanting to get involved.
I've been very unsure what the right policy to pursue is, but for a while I've been suspicious and worried about the role and position of Saudi and Qatar. Today Andrew Marr flagged up this story in the Telegraph. This was followed up on the show during the interview with the highly impressive former General Richards, who agreed with other military figures that diplomatic pressure can and must be asserted on these countries.
I agree. I think it is ridiculous to believe the Qatari rulers when they claim they are not involved or even aware of this. This is a country of only 800,000 citizens (the rest are poor immigrants). In such a small country there is no way the leaders would not know. And it explains why as usual it is the Americans who actually do the dirty work with the air strikes.
It therefore also means that we as citizens could do something. The Qatari leaders have made investments in Western Europe which are effectively PR stunts to make them look cuddly and nice. The Shard, Harrods, and of course the World Cup. In France, PSG. We can start to say, we don't like the idea that the same money that goes into these projects goes into supporting such a barbaric organisation as ISIL. If that sentiment took hold the Qataris would be seriously worried, as it would completely undermine their PR based rational for those projects. It would worry Abu Dhabi (Man City) who would be contaminated by association. The Saudis are a tougher one to crack, but they would take notice if Qatar had the World Cup taken away from them as a result of concern that ISIL is funded by Qatari money.
Time to start up a petition PA? I agree with you totally on this and it does allow something that we, as ordinary citizens, can usefully do. Good idea.
Time to start up a petition PA? I agree with you totally on this and it does allow something that we, as ordinary citizens, can usefully do. Good idea.
I would like to see a bit more evidence first,I must admit. My American commentator mate out here noted that Obama alluded to Arab states supporting ISIS when they bombed Syria, and that the claims of money flows from Arab states came from the US Treasury. I also note that in the second Telegraph article the politician doing the most to support the story is Liam Fox, not a man I would trust with a bargepole. The question is, if this is true, why then are the Americans happy to proclaim both Qatar and Saudi as allegedly active members of the coalition? Finally Andrew Marr bigged the Telegraph article up as some kind of major investigative work, but unless there is more in the print version, I was a bit underwhelmed once I'd read it.
I think it will come out in the wash in the next few weeks one way or another.
It is not suggested that the governments explicitly do. But the spectrum of opinion might be such in those countries that influential people might do, and the government turns a blind eye. Saudi, as @Addickted shows above, is not at all averse to beheading people it thinks deserve it.
How dare you suggest the actions of our armed forces are murder and in in any way similar to coldly beheading someone with a small knife! He was not even a combatant, but a peaceful big hearted man trying to do some good in the world.
I know the conversation has moved on but I'd just like to clear something up - I'm not calling the actions of our armed forces in legal wars murder. I was mainly referring to drone strikes that the US carry out (especially in countries that we (the West) aren't legally at war with) where civilians are killed through either intelligence mistakes or through trigger happy operators. In particular the eye opening news that the definition of a non-combatant drone strike death has been reclassified specifically to allow us to avoid reporting these deaths.
Your point regarding him not being a combatant is exactly mine - neither are many, many of the dead killed through Western air strikes - and the fact that these play no small part in helping the likes of ISIS recruit even more young men to join them.
I believe it's because they are Sunni countries and ISIS are a Sunni group, so the donors support the fight against the Shia government of Iraq and helped to fund/arm them when fighting in Syria.
Comments
A charity man there to help people, most of whom were Muslim and travelling with a Muslim convoy.
This simply proves to me these people are just a bunch os psychopaths hiding behind a sham they call Islam.
May AH rest in peace, maybe by travelling to the country he chose to put himself in harms way but this is appealing and I feel terribly for his poor family who's hope must have started to rise with the wide Muslim support an inaction by IS for 3 weeks or so.
Sadly the journalist will follow and anyone that has seen the video by his dad today cannot but be moved.
Alan RIP, you were a good man with good intentions.
If I hear `islam is the religion of peace' again .........
https://richarddawkins.net/2014/09/sleepwalking-toward-armageddon/
" if they kill a so-called "jackpot," the target that they’re aiming for, and they kill other unknown individuals, the system that the Obama administration, the U.S. military and CIA have developed is that anyone who is an EKIA, enemy killed in action, is someone who we don’t have proof that they’re innocent. In other words, it’s sort of a reversal of the idea that you’re innocent until proven guilty. If you are near someone that the U.S. was intending to kill, the presumption is that you are an EKIA, you’re an enemy killed in action—unless someone can prove that you weren’t. "
When we read about a lack of civilian casualties it doesn't actually necessarily mean that.
Additionally I read the other day the transcript of an interview with a drone operator who said that quite often they can see people crawling out of the wreckage missing body parts and being left to bleed to death. Is that really a more civilised way for an innocent person to die than being beheaded?
I'm not for a second in anyway trying to suggest that ISIS are anything but a warped, psychopathic group hellbent on causing as much pain and atrocities to shock the West as they can, but at the same time when our press make so much of the beheadings but fail to question our role in murdering civilians over there at the same time, it does frustrate me that as ever we only see one side of the story and my faith in the media diminishes even further.
RIP Alan Henning
http://www.democracynow.org/2014/10/3/jeremy_scahill_on_obamas_orwellian_war
ISIL are comitting genocide against whole populations and have committed a huge range of large scale and shocking human rights abuses according to the UN. They pose a real strategic threat to an entire area of immense sensitivity and there are a number of highly unstable highly armed countries which could get dragged in.
This is the single largest movement of refugees since the end of WW2 and the partition of India. I think that on balance the possible small scale collateral killing of civialians pales in to absolute insignificance compared to what has been done to the population of these countries in the last three years.
How dare you suggest the actions of our armed forces are murder and in in any way similar to coldly beheading someone with a small knife! He was not even a combatant, but a peaceful big hearted man trying to do some good in the world.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2780803/The-ISIS-hunter-Beckenham-Milwall-fan-used-run-London-cafe-spearheads-crack-Kurdish-unit-answering-cousin-s-call-fight-homeland.html
God bless the Kurds.
IS be afraid, be very afraid!
I agree. I think it is ridiculous to believe the Qatari rulers when they claim they are not involved or even aware of this. This is a country of only 800,000 citizens (the rest are poor immigrants). In such a small country there is no way the leaders would not know. And it explains why as usual it is the Americans who actually do the dirty work with the air strikes.
It therefore also means that we as citizens could do something. The Qatari leaders have made investments in Western Europe which are effectively PR stunts to make them look cuddly and nice. The Shard, Harrods, and of course the World Cup. In France, PSG. We can start to say, we don't like the idea that the same money that goes into these projects goes into supporting such a barbaric organisation as ISIL. If that sentiment took hold the Qataris would be seriously worried, as it would completely undermine their PR based rational for those projects. It would worry Abu Dhabi (Man City) who would be contaminated by association. The Saudis are a tougher one to crack, but they would take notice if Qatar had the World Cup taken away from them as a result of concern that ISIL is funded by Qatari money.
http://www.threeworldwars.com/albert-pike2.htm
I think it will come out in the wash in the next few weeks one way or another.
Your point regarding him not being a combatant is exactly mine - neither are many, many of the dead killed through Western air strikes - and the fact that these play no small part in helping the likes of ISIS recruit even more young men to join them.