= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
mwengler comments on Je suis Charlie - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (72)
In my opinion, people who understand the positives and negatives of western information flow recognize that the information flow claiming it was islamic fundamentalists is correct, that it is not some conspiracy to blame muslims, while the people who accept various non-western information sources such as pronouncements by various mullahs, and do not really have a detailed understanding of how the west lies and how it doesn't, get this one wrong.
No, I don't think we can or should agree to that. The west including its governments have not attributed a major attack to Islamic Terror which turned out on further evidence to not be Islamic Terror. Western authority is good on this topic. the evidence that the Charlie Hebdo massacre was Islamic Terror was good as virtually from the first reports of the crime. Certainly long before this post went up, it is a really safe conclusion that Islamic Terrorists shot up Charlie Hebdo.
I don't think you are using the word "aporia" right, but by its actual definition or by its definition implied by your context, it is not needed here, we know the acts were committed by Islamic Terrorists and that the counter-conspiracy theories are the usually erroneous kind arising from the same kinds of sources and motivations that they usually arise from.
I'm not sure whether that statement is true in that form.
Glenn Greenwald on democracy now:
FBI informants also pay Muslims money to commit terrorist acts to them imprison them before the actual act.
More controversially there an embassy bombing in London about which Annie Machon:
But in this case we have more than just Western sources, we also have al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) claim responsibility.
The Anders Brevik thing is interesting. That the west got the story correct within about 24 hours in my opinion leaves my point largely intact. Particularly in that I am opposing my point to the idea expressed by the Turkish president that the Charlie Hebdo attack was perpetrated by Israeli's trying to make the Muslims look bad, or the claims soon after 9/11 that 9/11 was either Israeli's or was a lie or whatever. One guy at the Brookings institution getting it wrong for one day, I'm happy to agree that my statement could be modified to something like "the mainstream west upon reflection has not attributed anything to Islamic Terror which is not Islamic Terror, although certainly plenty of individual's in the west have come up with plenty of misattributions both in favor of and against Muslims."
I agree that it's very unlikely that Israeli's share any responsibility for Charlie Hebdo attack. The point I wanted to illustrate that it's easy to make straightfoward claims that aren't fully true.
I think claiming that Palestianens bomb an Israeli embassy in London, is an attribution for Islamic Terror.
The thing that the Turkish premier denies isn't who pulled the trigger but who's responsible for those guys pulling the trigger. In particular he disbelieves that people known to have completed a terror training camp were able to coordinate such an attack without the secret service noticing.
Of course he's still wrong.
From Wikipedia:
"Aporia (Ancient Greek: ἀπορία: "impasse, difficulty of passing, lack of resources, puzzlement") denotes in philosophy a philosophical puzzle or state of puzzlement and in rhetoric a rhetorically useful expression of doubt."
especially note this part of the definition: "... or state of puzzlement ..."