Terrorists Bomb Moscow Airport 640
jayme0227 writes "Terrorists detonated a bomb at Moscow's busiest airport on Monday, killing 35 people and wounding another 152, Russian authorities said. President Dmitry Medvedev, who called the bombing a terrorist attack, ordered additional security at Moscow's other airports and transportation hubs, and Moscow police went on high alert in case of additional bombs."
According to the NY Times, "The airport remained open on Monday evening, and passengers continued to flow through the hall where the bomb had exploded."
Obviously not afraid of terrorists in Russia (Score:2, Interesting)
Here we'd have closed the airport for days to make it look like we were doing something. There, they just pick up the pieces and move on. Guess who's not going to still be running things in twenty years?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Here we'd have closed the airport for days to make it look like we were doing something.
Don't you think that has just a little to do with them being "used" to terrorism? The British didn't stop everything when the IRA was blowing stuff up, either.
I don't think I'm on board that our skin needs to be as thick as the Russians. It is admirable that they can move past such an event, but it's actually quite sad as well.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't think I'm on board that our skin needs to be as thick as the Russians. It is admirable that they can move past such an event, but it's actually quite sad as well.
I think it's more than a little sad that they are in such a situation. But what I find it even more than sad is hopeful. The only thing I really think it's unfortunate for people to be inured to is fraud.
Re:Obviously not afraid of terrorists in Russia (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Guess who's not going to still be running things in twenty years?
Russia?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Shouldn't they at least destroy their economy again with a prolonged war or something like that? How about a bit of racial profiling and cancer inducing body scanners? Seriously, where's the fun in bombing a country if they're not going to shit themselves?
Re:Obviously not afraid of terrorists in Russia (Score:5, Informative)
Russia has been involved in a high causality war costing them a lot of money and many lives since 1999. The causality rate for Russian combat soldiers in the Second Chechen War was roughly 5 times higher than for US and allied forces during the worst fighting in Iraq at the same period.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurgency_in_the_North_Caucasus [wikipedia.org]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Chechen_War [wikipedia.org]
Moscow theater hostage crisis - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscow_theater_hostage_crisis [wikipedia.org]
Beslan school hostage crisis - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beslan_school_hostage_crisis [wikipedia.org]
Domodedovo International Airport was the entry point for other terror attacks in the past and so it was one of the, if not the first airport with full body radar scanners - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_aircraft_bombings_of_August_2004 [wikipedia.org]
Re:Obviously not afraid of terrorists in Russia (Score:4, Informative)
The US hasn't had terrorism in apartment buildings, urban mass transit systems or transportation hubs like Russia has, so you can't say what the American response would be.
However when there was a mass shooting at LAX in 2002, they didn't shut down the airport.
Re: (Score:2)
Here we'd have closed the airport for days to make it look like we were doing something. There, they just pick up the pieces and move on. Guess who's not going to still be running things in twenty years?
I was struck by the same thing. In the USA, the affected airport terminal would be closed for days if not weeks, causing millions or tens of millions of dollars in travel disruptions with likely flight disruption across the country as airlines reschedule flights around the damaged terminal, further compounding the economic damage from the attack.
Re:Obviously not afraid of terrorists in Russia (Score:4, Informative)
In fairness, a hallmark of Al Qaeda is to blow something up, wait for first responders to arrive, and then blow it up again. So, securing the area might reduce loss of life in the event there were a second bomb.
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah, honestly I'd rather they just put us through metal detectors alone, while we still have our shoes on. The occasional bombing from terrorists is such a minor threat compared to all the other things that kill people every single day. Toss in some Israeli-style profiling, starting right when you drive into the airport, and again and again before you even get to the checkpoint, and we'll be just fine.
I don't want security, I just want hassle-free travel. Give me liberty or give me death. No other option i
Re: (Score:3)
You seem to be under the impression that the security theater has anything to do with security[.*]. It's about seizing more power, first and foremost.
That, and making people think they're safe to fly... air travel is vital to the US (and international) economy. If people were too afraid to fly, it would have devastating impacts on everything from car rental agencies to the tourist industry to huge companies like Boeing. That's why the government keeps throwing money at them every time they claim they're having financial troubles.
Unfortunately, and predictably, the security theater simply shifted the threat from the airplanes themselves to the large group
Sympathy for the victims, lessons for us (Score:5, Insightful)
Sacrificing civil liberties does not prevent terrorism.
Re: (Score:3)
"Sacrificing civil liberties does not prevent terrorism."
The only level of violence and reprisal sufficient to deter terrorism is at the level of what are called "war crimes", so only societies who are both powerful and ruthless can defeat (serious) terrorists.
The only counter to people who embrace being destroyed for their cause is to destroy an overwhelming number those they are fighting for. To the extent that societies embrace the "rights" of their mortal enemies, they are unable to fight.
Limiting the r
Re: (Score:3)
Case in point: Malaysia and South Korea teaching the West how to deal with piracy.
Bad choice of words (Score:5, Insightful)
Civil rights cannot be "sacrificed" or bargained with in any manner. The very notion smacks of tyranny, and fosters a conformist ideology where it is expected that governments cherry-pick the civil rights they "allow" for "their" people.
But I never sacrificed anything after 9/11 -- did you? Of course not. I don't know anybody that did. What actually happened is that your civil rights were stolen. from you. Denied. Oppressed. Attacked. You and I didn't have a say in it at all, and neither did the pawns who cheered it on. There was no "sacrifice" in any of this, only the elite at the top of the pyramid playing god with powers that no mortal man is worthy of.
Let's call a spade a spade: civil rights are either honored or oppressed. There is no picking and choosing.
Re:Bad choice of words (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Sympathy for the victims, lessons for us (Score:4, Interesting)
In fact, this is precisely the scenario that we've been talking on Slashdot for so long - the terrorists detonated the bomb in the crowded area right before the first controlled checkpoint in the airport (customs).
Next time you're at an airport, think about this (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Next time you're at an airport, think about thi (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Much less invasive and will ACTUALLY find any bomb residue/traces
Right, because ONLY Terrorists(TM) have any traces of explosives on them, and not any of the mining engineers, chemists, etc, etc, etc, who happen to be passing through the airport!
Seriously: I've worked for a couple of mining and geological exploration companies and to here them tell it all these "anti-terrorist" measures do nothing but make their lives less convenient.
If I were a Terrorist(TM) I'd get a job with a mining company, get a letter from my employer certifying that I handle explosives, and then
Re: (Score:3)
I was a combat engineer in the Army. Trust me, you don't want to have ANY residue on you if your going anywhere near a federal building/airport.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
If you have easy access to explosives, you probably SHOULD be inspected more closely, don't you think?
Household products are sufficient, so who does not have easy access?
Re: (Score:2)
You have a lot more to fear from false detection triggered by the cop handling the dog than a false positive from the dog nose itself.
Re: (Score:2)
Just think about this next time you're queued up forever in the security theater line waiting to get your junk touched.
Usually people don't wait in line in order to get their junk touched...
Re: (Score:2)
in the security theater line
This is a straw man. There will be lines at the airport, with or without "security theater". They can just as easily blow you up in a crowded jetway.
No one is selling the airport gate screening as a way to make the airport safer - they are selling as a way to make the plane (and potential targets on the ground) safer. We can argue whether or not this is effective, but there's no reason to set up a bogus argument.
Re: (Score:2)
All the terrorists would have to do is blow up two security lines at two different airports, and then "leak" info that there were at least 5 bombers. Air travel would shut down. TSA would then receive enough money to strip every person who wanted to fly.
Perhaps wed be forced to fly naked. Does bring up the possibility to have a strip club like atmosphere on airplanes though. Don't forget to bring lot of ones.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Cameras in the home, If a person is ever out of sight of a camera, well then they will have to be taken in and questioned. For safety sake of course.
Nice to see... (Score:5, Insightful)
"The airport remained open on Monday evening, and passengers continued to flow through the hall where the bomb had exploded."
Good to see the terrorists haven't won everywhere...
Re: (Score:2)
Already +5? Not surprising. I would prefer to see +100 Common Sense, though.
Re: (Score:2)
I've been in that airport and the first impression I had was the guards smoking under the "No Smoking" sign, with an ashtray there. My last impression (as we were getting ready to come home) was that they had a little old lady cleaning the men's room. Not only was it open, no one seemed bothered by it.
Re:Nice to see... (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm curious. Exactly why should anyone be bothered by it? Was she too old to be working and should have been on retirement? Or is your junk so special that you think a little old lady is getting turned on by seeing you handle it?
Re: (Score:2)
>ood to see the terrorists haven't won everywhere...
That's because a lot of the people in Eastern block countries where still oppressed till the late/early 80/90's and fear is what they lived with everyday so they accepted it as port of their daily life.. Here in Canada/US people are just spoiled and the effects of WW2 have long withered away so they look to the gov for protection which the gov is more then happy to use that as a way to control and take away basic rights.
Re: (Score:2)
Beef it up (Score:5, Funny)
Clearly, it is time to move the security checkpoint out into the parking lot.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Why not pre-screen them at home and then freeze them into cryo-storage for shipment?
Re:Beef it up (Score:5, Informative)
Clearly, it is time to move the security checkpoint out into the parking lot.
That's how they roll in Israel. Apparently, it's quite effective. http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/744199---israelification-high-security-little-bother [thestar.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Not exactly WWII (Score:5, Interesting)
The last time Russia was fighting for its territorial integrity 24 million Russians died. The terrorists have severely underestimated what it takes to frighten the Russian leadership into making concessions. You see, as long as all the terrorists die, the Russians don't really care. If you look at the Beslan massacre or the Moscow Theatre Seige, there was very little concern for the hostages, many of whom died during the raids by the security forces. It seems the main thing the government accomplished in both of the raids was killing all the terrorists and minimal casualties to security forces. It's probably modeled after things like Stalin's decision to not evacuate Stalingrad when the Nazis invaded.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not even sure how we can c
Re: (Score:3)
It's a hell of a lot more effective then hiding under your bed watching a colour coded "be afraid" signal.
Or wasting trillions on a war that only delivers more eager recruits into the hands of your enemies by destroying their homes, families and livelihoods.
You just don't get what this says do you.
The Russian government have just given the organisers of this attack an effective middle finger whilst
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
http://www.funnymotivationalposters.info/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/Spetsnaz.jpg [funnymotiv...sters.info]
Re:Not exactly WWII (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Not exactly WWII (Score:5, Interesting)
Wikipedia isn't a source, anyone with any sense would know that.
I have studied this war and I have taken collage courses that discussed it extensively including reading the logs and diaries of those involved. Stalin tried extensively to rewrite history after the war and claim holding onto Stalingrad was his idea at the start. Reading Wikipedia it's clear he was at least partially successful in that some fool that read the "corrected" version posted it. Stalin evacuated the entire Red Army across the Volgo river and committed the 6th army one of the weakest in the corp to defend the city at pain of death (if they tried to evacuate they would be shot). As the only army still remaining on the western side of the Volga it wasn't until the Nazi's were already in the city that the 6th arrived and began defensive maneuvers. I doubt Stalin thought they would succeed but he believed they would distract the Nazi's from severing the bridgeheads that allowed the Red army counterattack to cross.
Stalin committed the rest of the army to defense of two bridgeheads and crossings of the Volga while the rest of red army regrouped, reinforced and rearmed. As the Volga is a very large and dangerous river (compared to the Mississippi) with limited crossings. It wasn't until it was clear that the citizens along with their only reinforcements in the 6th Red Army had held the city (under penalty of death) that Stalin allowed real professional generals to began planing the offensive that cut off the Nazi supply lines and cost the Nazi's the most battle hardened and experienced divisions in the Nazi army. Later in the early winter when it was clear that Hitler was fully committed and the 6th was almost fully exhausted did Stalin order reinforcements boated across the river to hold the city until the remainder of the army was ready. Make no mistake, Stalin didn't order the holding of the city at any cost until it was clear that it could be done and he had the reinforcements on the way to perform the pincer maneuver from the two bridge heads that isolated the heart of the German army and starved them to death.
Stalin made sure to claim after the war that he planned it all from the start but the history is pretty clear that he didn't take that path until it was clear that the 6th with the help of the citizens and under threat of being shot by their own side did it become clear he could actually turn the tide. Incidentally it was his success in forcing the 6th to fight that caused him to create the suicide divisions in the army (that would be shot if they didn't advance) that was so successful in destroying the german army. Make no mistake, when he ordered the sixth to hold the city at any cost he did so with the belief that they wouldn't succeed and it wasn't until after they were nearly wiped out and he was in danger of losing the bridgeheads that he committed reinforcements.
Now if you relied on real history sources rather that Wikipedia you would know how inaccurate it can be.
here we go again with the violence. (Score:2)
I can see Russia moving armies and throwing bombs ...
meanwhile in Russia : nearly 100 traffic deaths A DAY. http://www.car-accidents.com/country-car-accidents/russia-car-crash-accidents.html [car-accidents.com]
Re: (Score:2)
> meanwhile in Russia : nearly 100 traffic deaths A DAY.
Speaking of meaningless statistics, in the US there are over 100 traffic deaths a day.
Meaningless because it's not accounting for population differences, differences in car ownership rates, differences in the kinds of vehicles on the roads, differences in the roads, etc, etc.
So other than "a bunch of people dead every year", it doesn't mean much...
I went through this airport the day before. (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not surprising that these idiots were able to bomb the place. Whilst there's always a guy at the door with a metal detector / baggage scanning machine when you walk in everyone just walks right through so you're not actually being scanned unless they specifically stop you (never happens unless they *really* don't like they way you look. Now of course that will change for a while... but Russia is such a big place with so many landmarks that can be targeted that there's no way to stop some lunatics from blowing themselves up in public and killing people if they're really keen on it.
The one difference worth noting is that in Russia/Israel/India etc... they just get back to work, in USA they would've created some 500 million $ memorial and immortalized the event for at least a decade.
Freedom to live, freedom to live free? (Score:2)
We've often posed the question on /., what happens when someone hits a security checkpoint? Do we add security checkpoints for security checkpoints? All we're doing is lumping people up. Given population densities, there will ALWAYS be places where people congregate. Do we go to a system of armed guards in every public place, Israeli-style? Admit that once someone has a working bomb, it's almost impossible to stop them from getting it to somewhere with lots of people and setting it off, and then invade
For a minute I thought I was on slashdot. (Score:2)
So much for security theater (Score:5, Insightful)
There's no easy way to prevent this, unless the security checkpoint is at the front door, in which case you still have a large queue of people, even more miserable and pissed off that they have to stand inline outside. Even if they made people strip naked, it still wouldn't stop the first clever terrorist to shove the bomb up his ass.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
See the report from the person who was actually at the airport. It seems that actually in Russia's case it really was security theater since metal detectors were optional, not mandatory as we have here. So our security would have prevented this attack (in the terminal anyway).
Re:So much for security theater (Score:5, Funny)
still wouldn't stop the first clever terrorist to shove the bomb up his ass.
Since when is shoving anything up your ass considered "clever"?
How long until someone blames... (Score:2)
... Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 for this? Yes, I went there.
Unfortunately you have to move on (Score:5, Informative)
Terrorist attacks are horrible.
I've personally been in areas in Israel where massive bombs exploded killing and maiming dozens of people, weeks before the incident. It's a fact of life.
There are bomb scares every day in Israel. Woops. Grandpa left his grocery bag unattended next to an ATM. Area is closed off.
You can see people waiting impatiently, tapping their feet with a "come on get on with it" look at the bomb sapper in full gear is tippy toeing to the bag (abandoned grocery bag),
detonating it in minutes. Once the all clear is rang out, as the bomb sapper is nervously taking his bomb proof helmet off, sitting on sidewalk, slowly pulling out a cigarette, people are practically pushing and shoving next to him,
right next to where the "bomb" was, queuing to use the ATM.
I saw this scenario happening a few times.
People get on with their lives.
security theatre is dangerous, and only common sense, intelligence, and self-policing will work.
Make sure you design public spaces with heightened terrorist attack value (e.g. airport) well designed to lower casualty count.
Why is it... (Score:2)
That most of the posts here are about the security practices of airports in different countries rather than even commenting on the terrorist attack itself?
You'd think we'd be marginally upset about some individuals blowing up a bunch of other individuals. Maybe even interested in what caused it, where it came from, who did it.
Instead, we just argue about TSA.
Not saying we shouldn't argue about TSA... but perhaps that's not the only thing there is to argue about.
Another sad day, now move on (Score:5, Insightful)
Assholes. (Score:4, Insightful)
Slaughtering innocent people who are just trying to get from point A to point B won't further your aims, won't garner any sympathy, and certainly won't win you the hearts and minds of the rest of the world. You aren't freedom fighters, heroes, or martyrs, you're just assholes killing innocent people.
Re:All Religions are like that (Score:2)
I put no stock in religion. By the word religion I have seen the lunacy of fanatics of every denomination be called the will of god. I have seen too much religion in the eyes of too many murderers. Holiness is in right action, and courage on behalf of those who cannot defend themselves, and goodness. What god desires is here [points to head] and here [points to heart] and what you decide to do every day, you will be a good man - or not.
I can't say it better, so I won't even try.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
All religion is tainted. The foundation of modern Christianity was forged in the inquisition and before that in the crimes of the Hebrew. No religion can be just when it is founded on oppression, rape, murder, slavery and genocide. I know this because I have lived in a "good christian home" and saw violence and depravity that few can imagine. I know this because I read my bible, every chapter, every verse, every word. Then I studied other religions and found them as filled with vile filth as my own. A good
Re:All Religions are like that (Score:5, Insightful)
I know this because I have lived in a "good christian home" and saw violence and depravity that few can imagine
If few can even imagine the "violence and depravity" you witnessed at home, and Christianity is one of the world's major religions, it stands to reason that perhaps by any definition of Christianity that you didn't actually live in a "good Christian home". Also I don't know what version of the bible you're reading "every chapter, every verse, and every word" of but if it has anything about the Spanish Inquisition being the foundation of Christianity then you should probably buy a new one.
Re:All Religions are like that (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't see how this relates at all to the topic I was addressing but I'd agree with the money issue. I've never seen a church that required you to pay anything though unless you want to use their building for a wedding or something, which seems rather understandable to me. Unless we're going to consider asking for donations to be the definition of corrupt now and lump that child cancer hospital that asks for donations at the movie theater into the corrupt category.
I don't understand why having principals and guides about how children should be raised would make a faith corrupt. We're talking about a way of life here, and your claiming that no way of life should guide someone in how to deal with the biggest part of most people's lives? That just doesn't make any sense.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, all Muslims are terrorists, I'm sure all Christians are murderous like during the crusades too.
Re:Joke Time (Score:5, Insightful)
I think the point was that condemning an entire religion for the actions of a few is, well, stupid. Be it Christian fundamentalist murderers, Islamic fundamentalist murderers, cow rapers, or fungal mutant centrists.
Re: (Score:3)
Point taken.
Maybe this would be better: I'm sure all Christians are like the Irish Republican Army, the Lord's Resistance Army, the National Liberation Front of Tripura, the Russian National Unity, the Ku Klux Klan, and the Hutaree.
Re: (Score:2)
Christians kill FAR MORE OFTEN than Muslims and with less conscience and more impunity. People like to cite "the crusades" but that is ancient history. Let's have a look at more recent history. Right here in the U.S. we see racially violence and murder which is still "condoned by their god." To this day, non-christians in this country are made to feel uncomfortable, intimidated, excluded and even in fear for their lives due to the relatively high frequency of racial profiling of law enforcement and othe
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Putin isn't the president of Russia anymore as he served their constitutional term limit of two terms. Dmitry Medvedev is the current president, and has been since 2008. Putin now serves as 'Prime Minister'.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
There are lots of ethnic issues around the world. Why is it that every time some crazy fucker blows up himself and a whole bunch of innocent people he turns out to be a Muslim. Coincidence?
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
No, not every time, here's one:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_City_bombing [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The Chechen people are primarily Islamic in faith.
I know that you didnt really want to support the point of the person you were replying to, but thats exactly what you did.
Now I don't know if its the religion itself, the economic conditions that are primarily experienced by those of the religion, the political situations in the regions of its popularity, or what...
Re: (Score:3)
You can get a much higher body count if you don't have to make it out alive yourself. So yes, it's much better when terrorists constrain themselves to using methods that allow themselves to walk away alive.
For example, if someone illegally parks a big suspicious truck right against a building and runs off, you have a chance to clear the area while the time bomb is ticking. But if he doesn't care about surviving, he just plows the thing straight into the building, no warning, and gets a more destructive de
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Joke Time (Score:4, Interesting)
There are over a billion Muslims in the world. There is a 1/6 chance of any randomly selected person being Muslim.
If only 1 out of 6 suicide bombers were Muslim you would have a pretty good argument right there. Maybe you're not proving what you think you're proving.
I had Christians, Muslims, and Jews at my wedding... we got along then, and 10 years later we are still getting along!
That's nice, but were your wedding guests randomly selected from the entire world? No? Then what is your point? That your own close circle of friends has different dynamics than the societal thrusts of populations numbering in the hundreds of millions and billions spread across the entire globe?? Wow, I never would have guessed that.
Transposed Conditionals (Score:5, Insightful)
No, it's not a coincidence. It's also not very useful.
You need to examine the distinction between "Statistical Significance" and "Practical Importance".
For example, suppose the difference in IQ scores between people in two cities is 1/2 point. The studies can be extremely accurate and the results can be correct to a strong degree of statistical significance, but the overall result is of no practical importance.
Similar with Muslim extremists. Try to assign a probability (high or low) to each of the following:
Probability that someone is a Muslim, given that they are terrorist.
Probability that someone is a terrorist, given that they are Muslim.
There are about 8,500 people on the U.S. "no fly" list, and about 1.5 billion followers of Islam. If *all* terrorists are Muslims, you still have to sort through 175,000 profiled people to find one terrorist.
This is not a piece of data which is useful in and of itself from which to draw conclusions or make policy.
You don't have to be afraid of your neighbors, even if they are are from Pakistan.
Re: (Score:3)
The "crazy fucker" who shot [huffingtonpost.com]
Gabrielle Giffords strangely, wasn't Muslim.
(cough)
Re:Joke Time (Score:4, Informative)
This is an ethnic issue between Russia and North Caucasus.
It was an ethnic issue back in 1994-1996, during the First Chechen War. It stopped being an ethnic issue in 1999, when "mujahideen" from the then de-facto independent Chechnya invaded the neighboring Dagestan, proclaiming the long-term goal of driving the "kaffir" out of Caucasus and establishing a unified Islamic state there [wikipedia.org].
Re:Joke Time (Score:4, Informative)
Why? Because Dagestan was predominantly Muslim and the first militia formations opposing Chechens in Dagestan during the first days of war was Muslim as well.
Various Dagestan ethnicities are, traditionally, Sufi Muslims. On the other hand, the folk who invaded in '99 were hardcore Salafi fundamentalists who regard most Sufi practices - especially the institute of murshids [wikipedia.org], and Sufi ritualized dhikr [wikipedia.org] - as shirk [wikipedia.org], and see it as their religious duty to stamp it out (and they did try to do so in captured areas of Dagestan). So religion still makes a difference there.
The same division exists within Chechnya, by the way. Chechen nationalist party - represented in past by Dudaev and Maskhadov - are mostly traditionalist in aspects of religion, and so are Sufi (though Dudaev wasn't even particularly religious in general). The Islamist party, with a nucleus formed of foreign "mujahideen" and young new converts such as Sayyid Buratsky - are Salafi. The latter party prevailed, which is why the war in '99 even happened. The latter party is also the one that unilaterally disbanded Chechen government-in-exile and proclaimed "Caucasian Emirate".
Re: (Score:2)
Know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em, know when to walk away, know when to run... :p
Re: (Score:2)
I want my whiskey back.
Re:Joke Time (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Joke Time (Score:4, Insightful)
Why do you link to an article about the First Chechen War, which happened in mid-90s? A lot of things happened since then - for example, a second war which began after religious faction in Chechen rebel government (people such as Shamil Basaev, Doka Umarov, and amir Khattab) got the upper hand in the little infighting that they had after Dudaev's death - the war which began as a jihad to "liberate" Muslim territories outside of Chechnya [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, all separatists use suicide bombers, regardless of their religion. Like in Quebec or Slovakia, for instance. Oh wait...
Re:Joke Time (Score:5, Insightful)
That the separatists happen to be largely Muslim is inconsequential.
But as a consequence of the separatists being Muslim, their cause is taken up by supporters of global jihad throughout the Muslim world. Just like fighters in Kashmir and Palestine, they receive support from abroad solely due to their religion and the religion of their opponents.
How can you not call that a consequence?? Do you even know what "inconsequential" means?
Re: (Score:2)
Islam is wonderful, any criticism of any religion is flamebait because superstition cannot be attacked like other ideologies.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, besides, if you do criticize Islam, they will kill you. Well, call for your death.. if they don't succeed, the first isn't necessarily not true, just not succesful.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed, the Soviet Union provided advisers to Arafat from the beginning to guide him in a propaganda campaign to destabilize Western influence in the entire area. The hijacking of history from Jewish and Christian historical links into Muslim history before Islam ever existed is only one facet of the campaign to drive Western influence from the Middle East, starting with Israel. Israel is only the first target. After all, the US is the Great Satan; Israel is only the Little Satan.
The Soviet Union provided a
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
There is no "Islamic Terror".
There are deep intelligence operations. These are funded by Mossad, CIA, Pakistan's ISI, etc.
A complete investigation of David Headley - for just one example - would give you some idea of the nature of para-political, deep-state actors in perpetrating terror for their own ends, and the usefulness of the "Islamic" fiction.
If you think that you are capable of correctly evaluating the the real nature of these events, based on the unexamined and uninvestigated statements of official sources? Then you do not correctly ascertain the meaning or implications of the term "disinformation".
Ask yourself this: "Does my government maintain a policy of disinformation, regarding its own people? If so, how would I know? Is the reporting of independent, corporate news agencies a sufficient source of information to verify or validate these claims?"
http://www.carlbernstein.com/magazine_cia_and_media.php [carlbernstein.com]
http://danwismar.com/uploads/Bernstein%20-%20CIA%20and%20Media.htm [danwismar.com]
I suggest you take up mindfulness meditation for 5-15 minutes a day. Wen yourself from all "news" for one month. Then come back, and look freshly at the spinning matrix of lies.
You have a UID of 137, and you've posted the dumbest thing I've ever read on the internet.
Your argument is "You can't trust the government! You can't trust the media! Trust me and my hyperlinks! Also, meditate!".
Re:Joke Time (Score:5, Informative)
Contrary to popular Slashdot lore, low UIDs do not necessarily correlate with increased intelligence.
They might start correlating with increased dementia...
Re: (Score:2)
My understanding (from numerous somewhat conflicting articles) was that this bomb was detonated in the baggage claim/arrivals area. Baggage claim is insid
Re: (Score:2)
No, but I'm sure Rush "big fat drug addict racist" Limbaugh will say that this is a reason we can't have a mosque near ground zero. And then he'll do his Chinaman impersonation to piss off yet another billion people.
Re:If we're lucky.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Hopefully, Russia took out Jerusalem and we'll have World Peace.
They would fight over the ruins.
Re: (Score:3)
Russia recently developed the largest fuel-air explosive yet deployed. They should erase an enemy city in reprisal for every attack.
It's a bit tricky when all cities in Chechnya are officially fully under control of the federal government - so what, bomb your own citizens on your own territory?
In fact, there's no war there at all. Just some local police operations against small bands of desperate terrorists. Or so the Russian TV tells me.
Re: (Score:3)
The goal of religious terrorism is never to get people to convert. In fact, terrorism is by its very nature political. In the case of Chechnya, the issue is not so much religion as it is government. The issue is that ethnic Chechens feel the region should be autonomous. They just happen to be predominately Muslim. Now, there are plenty of radical Chechens out there and are fighting aver religion, but most of those don't operate in Russia, they went to Afghanistan or Iraq.
Now, Islamic terrorism generall