The Â鶹ÉçÌý permalink
Mohammed Emwazi
-
Message 1.Ìý
Posted by KL (U16232958) on Sunday, 1st March 2015
Why does the Â鶹Éç continue to use an inappropriate nickname for this murderer. It makes him sound like a hero and not a terrorist. Shame on you!
-
Message 2
Posted by The Man Who Watched Telly (U15436784) on Sunday, 1st March 2015
And Jack the Ripper, stop it Â鶹Éç.
-
Message 3
Posted by Grouchyman (U1972471) on Sunday, 1st March 2015
Yes, and it's offends all of us named 'John' so please will the Â鶹Éç and all media desist in the use of the inappropriate nickname! Thanks
-
Message 4
Posted by Guv-nor (U7476305) on Sunday, 1st March 2015
But then we must consider all the People from Yorkshire.
Thanks to Peter Sutcliffe known as the "Yorkshire Ripper". -
Message 5
Posted by Portly (U1381981) on Monday, 2nd March 2015
I don't know any Muslims called "John."
It's a mysterious choice of nickname. Probably initiated by a particularly thick journalist. -
Message 6
Posted by Gizmomoo (U10999499) on Monday, 2nd March 2015
It's because there are/were 4 British Isis members who stuck together, they got the nickname the Fab Four (presumably from their terrorist mates) John, Paul, George and Ringo.
I agree he shouldn't be referred to as John. Actually the media coverage over the weekend has left me feeling quite angry. -
Message 7
Posted by The Man Who Watched Telly (U15436784) on Monday, 2nd March 2015
John Lennon, he sounded like a Beatle according to the American news networks.
-
Message 8
Posted by The Man Who Watched Telly (U15436784) on Monday, 2nd March 2015
Seems it was some hostages named him John.
-
Message 9
Posted by Technicolour (U4590479) on Monday, 2nd March 2015
Giving a nickname especially when the real name is known lends unwarranted status. It always sounded frivolous and inappropriate, now it should be dropped IMO.
-
Message 10
Posted by wolfie (U15842015) on Monday, 2nd March 2015
yes...but the nickname was given before his real name was known...that...as illustrated above...tends to stick...
Yorkshire ripper.... black panther...railway killers...you name it...
surely the media should use the names that the public knows...
just giving the name...even now...the public wouldn't relate it to the murderer... -
Message 11
Posted by ferval (U14315357) on Monday, 2nd March 2015
Giving a nickname especially when the real name is known lends unwarranted status. It always sounded frivolous and inappropriate, now it should be dropped IMO.Ìý I entirely agree, the media have created a celebrity terrorist and that very celebrity is being exploited by IS to recruit more followers.
Don't people realise that these people may behave like medieval thugs but they have a sophisticated understanding of how to manipulate social media and publicity to further their cause and attract those who seek that very celebrity and attention that has been conferred on this murderer by the thoughtless application of such an inappropriate tag. -
Message 12
Posted by Maxibaby (U14151672) ** on Monday, 2nd March 2015
I think it's wrong of the media to give a platform to the apologists who have been on saying what a great bloke he was before radicalization, then trying to shift the blame for this onto the Security Services, who are damned if they do and damned if they don't. They do an amazing job, I think, particularly in view of the restraints placed upon them. Could we have someone talking about the speakers invited to his university and to his mosque, and what they were advocating?
-
Message 13
Posted by wolfie (U15842015) on Monday, 2nd March 2015
this guy was called john by his hostages...
although its the british media that started calling him jihadi john or jailer john... -
Message 14
Posted by Myshkin (U16115560) ** on Monday, 2nd March 2015
I don't know any Muslims called "John."
It's a mysterious choice of nickname. Probably initiated by a particularly thick journalist.Ìý I suspect you have heard of at least one Muslim called Yaya though...which is the same name in Arabic. -
Message 15
Posted by floatingvoter (U15020995) on Monday, 2nd March 2015
What should we or the media have called him when his image was recognised worldwide while remaining anonymous?
That bloke with the mask and the machete in his hand?
It was a convenient label because he was clearly English. That's all. -
Message 16
Posted by weesnowball (U5509747) on Monday, 2nd March 2015
"........he was clearly English........"
Really?!? -
Message 17
Posted by wolfie (U15842015) on Monday, 2nd March 2015
He's not English though is he...Kuwaiti...
-
Message 18
Posted by Maxibaby (U14151672) ** on Monday, 2nd March 2015
Wonder if he will be paying his university tuition fees, and any student loans he received?
-
Message 19
Posted by The Man Who Watched Telly (U15436784) on Monday, 2nd March 2015
Hurricanes are given names, they're really bad, is that not offensive?
-
Message 20
Posted by Gizmomoo (U10999499) on Monday, 2nd March 2015
Hurricanes are not sentient beings that have a choice whether to kill people or not.
-
Message 21
Posted by ferval (U14315357) on Monday, 2nd March 2015
What should we or the media have called him when his image was recognised worldwide while remaining anonymous?
That bloke with the mask and the machete in his hand?
It was a convenient label because he was clearly English. That's all.Ìý Something neutral, 'the English speaking terrorist' perhaps?
It's worth considering why he was selected to front up the videos and what was hoped to be achieved by that. In fact the media have colluded in producing a figure with whom young, disaffected, British men and women can immediately identify and even seek to emulate. The ridiculous, frivolous 'Jihadi John' tag just serves to normalise him and lessen the distance which young Muslims in the UK who might be susceptible to radicalisation might feel exists between them and the bulk of the IS forces.
They're not stupid, the IS leadership, and are very aware of the western obsession with celebrity and how this man's prominence will ensure continued publicity. Here is a young man who might have lived his life in obscurity but now, if you google 'Jihadi John', it produces 22 million results. -
Message 22
Posted by Turner (U14992668) on Monday, 2nd March 2015
I think it's wrong of the media to give a platform to the apologists who have been on saying what a great bloke he was before radicalization, then trying to shift the blame for this onto the Security Services, who are damned if they do and damned if they don't. They do an amazing job, I think, particularly in view of the restraints placed upon themÌý
The role MI5 and MI6 play in the radicalisation of UK Muslims *definitely* needs to be investigated. It can't be a coincidence that the two worst cases of this phenomenon in recent years, the Lee Rigby murderer and now 'Jihadi John', were both first subjected to interrogations and ill treatment abroad by MI6, and then aggressively targeted as possible 'recruits'.
Considering what we now know about the behaviour of our intelligence services in previous years (secret renditions, shady deals, etc), I think the worst has still to come out. -
Message 23
This posting has been hidden during moderation because it broke the in some way.
-
Message 24
Posted by The Man Who Watched Telly (U15436784) on Monday, 2nd March 2015
The west tortures and imprisons humans without trial, everyday drones are killing innocent people who happen to be near a chosen target. Our media mostly ignores this, why? Because its happening to Muslims that's why. Then we scratch our heads and wonder why a some young men seem to be driven crazy by what's happening. These people are insane and we need to work out why they have become insane if we are to end the madness. Frankly naming someone John should be the least of our worries.
-
Message 25
This posting has been hidden during moderation because it broke the in some way.
-
Message 26
Posted by wolfie (U15842015) on Monday, 2nd March 2015
giz...you could say that this human being isn't a sentient being...
-
Message 27
Posted by Gizmomoo (U10999499) on Monday, 2nd March 2015
Very true wolfie.
-
Message 28
Posted by Portly (U1381981) on Monday, 2nd March 2015
Although hurricanes have been tamed by political correctness! They used to be christened with girls names, reflecting the dangerous nature of the female of the species. Some 20 years ago the meteorologists were badgered into giving them boys' names too.
-
Message 29
Posted by Harvey Specter (U4307220) ** on Monday, 2nd March 2015
Although hurricanes have been tamed by political correctness! They used to be christened with girls names, reflecting the dangerous nature of the female of the species. Some 20 years ago the meteorologists were badgered into giving them boys' names too.Ìý Glad to hear it right?
-
Message 30
Posted by Â鶹Éç auto-messages (U294) on Monday, 2nd March 2015
Editorial Note: This conversation has been moved from 'Â鶹Éç Television programmes' to 'The Â鶹Éç'.
I'm moving this out of Â鶹Éç TV programmes to the Â鶹Éç board. -
Message 31
Posted by Harvey Specter (U4307220) ** on Monday, 2nd March 2015
Editorial Note: This conversation has been moved from 'Â鶹Éç Television programmes' to 'The Â鶹Éç'.
I'm moving this out of Â鶹Éç TV programmes to the Â鶹Éç board.Ìý Could you reinstate the original message as well?
Cheers pal. -
Message 32
Posted by Maxibaby (U14151672) ** on Monday, 2nd March 2015
The west tortures and imprisons humans without trial, everyday drones are killing innocent people who happen to be near a chosen target. Our media mostly ignores this, why? Because its happening to Muslims that's why. Then we scratch our heads and wonder why a some young men seem to be driven crazy by what's happening. These people are insane and we need to work out why they have become insane if we are to end the madness. Frankly naming someone John should be the least of our worries.Ìý Why aren't these young men being driven crazy by ISIS carrying out mass beheadings of their fellow Muslims? Or Al Shebab kidnapping and enslaving their fellow-Muslims? Is it OK if a Muslim does terrible things to Muslims, but drives young men crazy if it's done by non-Muslims, and is a licence to do even more beheadings and murders?
-
Message 33
Posted by Harvey Specter (U4307220) ** on Monday, 2nd March 2015
i think it's because fundamentalists/terrorists are particularly adept at radicalising weak minds into becoming soldiers of their war. Attempting to highlight the double standards they hold in a reasonabed articulate argument doesnt have the same emotional effect over them.
-
Message 34
Posted by Maxibaby (U14151672) ** on Monday, 2nd March 2015
i think it's because fundamentalists/terrorists are particularly adept at radicalising weak minds into becoming soldiers of their war. Attempting to highlight the double standards they hold in a reasonabed articulate argument doesnt have the same emotional effect over them.Ìý Not sure in this case about 'weak mind', Harvey. He had a university education, and was doing a job in computers! Still, from what is being said, the Security Services would appear to have to do little to radicalize young Muslim men - probably less than other Muslims who are themselves radical or fundamentalist.
-
Message 35
Posted by Harvey Specter (U4307220) ** on Monday, 2nd March 2015
He may well be intelligent in the context of academia, Maxibaby, but I would suggest these people at the lower end of these regimes are dirty little weak minded freaks who cant muster any intelligence to think for themselves when considering an argument such as one you have posed.
-
Message 36
Posted by Maxibaby (U14151672) ** on Monday, 2nd March 2015
Probably right - emotional appeal can easily override intelligence. Just seems that the discipline to study should have resulted in a bit of analytical ability when making decisions as to right and wrong.
-
Message 37
Posted by Turner (U14992668) on Monday, 2nd March 2015
There's so much ignorance and prejudice in this 'what causes young Muslims to become terrorists' - and so little real interest in finding out the real answers.
An article some of you may find interesting reading:
-
Message 38
Posted by Turner (U14992668) on Monday, 2nd March 2015
Preview Turner, preview!
That should have been
in this 'what causes young Muslims to become terrorists' debate Ìý -
Message 39
Posted by Chris Huenemoerder (U16227413) on Monday, 2nd March 2015
He's not English though is he...Kuwaiti...Ìý No, his family were ethnic Iraqis living in Kuwait, but they were NOT Kuwaiti citizens. That was the reason they came to the UK in the first place; at the time, the family was having trouble in Kuwait, because of the tensions surrounding the Gulf Wars.
------------------------
On why he came to be on the radar of the security services
He came on to the radar of the security services having been refused entry to Tanzania. For whatever reason, he was being accused of trying to enter Somalia. When he returned to Europe, he was met by members of British and Dutch intelligence who had been informed of what had been suspected. He was allowed to carry on, but the authorities kept a close eye on him, at times, trying to get information from him, and he found it impossible to return to Kuwait (he was refused a visa to return). -
Message 40
Posted by Turner (U14992668) on Monday, 2nd March 2015
Yep. And after harassing him for years, MI5 tried to recruit him and come over to the dark side. Talk about clueless.
-
Message 41
Posted by Maxibaby (U14151672) ** on Monday, 2nd March 2015
Yep. And after harassing him for years, MI5 tried to recruit him and come over to the dark side. Talk about clueless.Ìý What do you mean by the 'dark side'? Those who are beheading innocent people and kidnapping and raping women, or the security services who are trying to protect this country from suicide bombers and people who murder soldiers on our streets? He'd have been a bit more than harassed if ISIS had decided he wasn't in favour of them.
-
Message 42
Posted by wolfie (U15842015) on Monday, 2nd March 2015
Don't care if his family were ethnic Martians.....
I'm old fashioned enough to believe that your nationality is dependant on the country in which you were born.... -
Message 43
Posted by Turner (U14992668) on Monday, 2nd March 2015
I meant that after harassing him and threatening him for years (and putting so much pressure on him that he moved to Kuwait rather than being continually subjected to this treatment), they thought it would be a good move to ask him to switch sides and start spying on other Muslims, in a 'you're either with us or against us' narrative.
I mean, who actually makes these decisions? -
Message 44
Posted by Chris Huenemoerder (U16227413) on Monday, 2nd March 2015
No, they tried from the very beginning, in 2009 when he returned to Amsterdam. A Home Office report in 2011 notes that he was already moving in more radical circles. If you suspect someone of having radical connections - in part because he was refused entry to Tanzania on suspicion of being a radical Muslim, in part of the circles he was moving in - of course you are going to want to keep an eye on him.
-
Message 45
Posted by Maxibaby (U14151672) ** on Monday, 2nd March 2015
I meant that after harassing him and threatening him for years (and putting so much pressure on him that he moved to Kuwait rather than being continually subjected to this treatment), they thought it would be a good move to ask him to switch sides and start spying on other Muslims, in a 'you're either with us or against us' narrative.
I mean, who actually makes these decisions?Ìý
You have seen a transcript of the security services interviews with this man, and know first hand what the 'harassment' consisted of?
Who makes these decisions? Possibly people with intelligence services backgrounds, and knowledge about this particular person. Do you have either? He had been quite happy to be educated in this country, and to live here, possibly giving grounds for the approach to give information. And are you saying that giving information on potential terrorists to our authorities is the 'dark side'? -
Message 46
Posted by Turner (U14992668) on Monday, 2nd March 2015
No, they tried from the very beginning, in 2009 when he returned to Amsterdam. A Home Office report in 2011 notes that he was already moving in more radical circles. If you suspect someone of having radical connections - in part because he was refused entry to Tanzania on suspicion of being a radical Muslim, in part of the circles he was moving in - of course you are going to want to keep an eye on him.Ìý
The details are still somewhat vague (partly due to the security services' reluctance to disclose information), but what is clear is that our intelligence services' tactics have time and time again proved to be outdated and counter-productive, relying as they do on disruption and interference more than prosecution and imprisonment.
Both Emwazi's and Adebolajo's cases show their incompetence.
And then there's the matter of the treatment both received abroad, and the distinct possibility UK officials were complicit, and behaved in a way that completely bypassed all legal obligations... -
Message 47
Posted by Turner (U14992668) on Monday, 2nd March 2015
I meant that after harassing him and threatening him for years (and putting so much pressure on him that he moved to Kuwait rather than being continually subjected to this treatment), they thought it would be a good move to ask him to switch sides and start spying on other Muslims, in a 'you're either with us or against us' narrative.
I mean, who actually makes these decisions?Ìý
You have seen a transcript of the security services interviews with this man, and know first hand what the 'harassment' consisted of?
Who makes these decisions? Possibly people with intelligence services backgrounds, and knowledge about this particular person. Do you have either? He had been quite happy to be educated in this country, and to live here, possibly giving grounds for the approach to give information. And are you saying that giving information on potential terrorists to our authorities is the 'dark side'?Ìý
I give up. -
Message 48
Posted by Maxibaby (U14151672) ** on Monday, 2nd March 2015
I meant that after harassing him and threatening him for years (and putting so much pressure on him that he moved to Kuwait rather than being continually subjected to this treatment), they thought it would be a good move to ask him to switch sides and start spying on other Muslims, in a 'you're either with us or against us' narrative.
I mean, who actually makes these decisions?Ìý
You have seen a transcript of the security services interviews with this man, and know first hand what the 'harassment' consisted of?
Who makes these decisions? Possibly people with intelligence services backgrounds, and knowledge about this particular person. Do you have either? He had been quite happy to be educated in this country, and to live here, possibly giving grounds for the approach to give information. And are you saying that giving information on potential terrorists to our authorities is the 'dark side'?Ìý
I give up.Ìý You made an unequivocal statement that he had been harassed and threatened for years, indicating that you had solid information of what had happened to him. You later posted that details are still vague. Doesn't really add up
You either know stuff, or base your assertion on vague details, and present it as fact. -
Message 49
Posted by Malyndi (U14320297) on Monday, 2nd March 2015
Poor treatment by those in authority, whoever they are, is *no* excuse for anyone to make the choice to kill random people who have not directly harmed them.
At the end of the day, the only person responsible for the murders of those hostages is Mohammed Emwazi. -
Message 50
Posted by Turner (U14992668) on Monday, 2nd March 2015
Some *details* are still vague - dates, precise locations, etc; that he'd been harassed by security services for years (like Adebolajo) is in every newspaper.
I suggest you do a little bit of reading before engaging further
About this Board
The Points of View team invite you to discuss Â鶹Éç Television programmes.
Add basic or to your posts.
Questions? Check the for answers first!
Go to: Â鶹Éç News to discuss topics in the news
Make a complaint? Go to the website.
Â鶹Éç News: Off-topic for this board, so contact them directly with your feedback:
or Ìýto take part in a discussion.
Mon-Sat: 0900-2300
Sun: 1000-2300
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
Recent Discussions
Â鶹Éç iD
Â鶹Éç navigation
Â鶹Éç links
Copyright © 2015 Â鶹Éç. The Â鶹Éç is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.