News Paris shooting and explosion kills at least 140

[StevieTNZ]

https://nz.news.yahoo.com/top-stories/a/30093213/fatalities-reported-in-paris-restaurant-shooting/

At least 26 people have been killed and several others wounded after a shooting and several explosions in Paris on Friday night.

It's believed at least 60 people have been taken hostage inside Bataclan Concert Hall.

 

[Borg]

Just saw it on the news. Poor France. Our thoughts are with you.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

46 dead 100 held hostage. Sickening

 

[DrClaude]

The French president has declared a state of emergency for the entire country.

 

[DrClaude]

There appears to have been 5 or 6 coordinated attacks.

 

[fresh_42]

Just wrote on fb today: It's a funny thing to almost simultaneously debate from Europe with someone from the US, another one from Australia and many wherever they're from. Internet made this globe into a living room and math its common language. Then I turned on the news ...

 

[HossamCFD]

Horrific news. Stay strong France!

AFP tweets:

#BREAKING Attacker in Paris concert hall shouted 'Allahu akbar', fired into crowd, witness says

 

[nsaspook]

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

118 confirmed dead. How does this change France and or Europe?

 

[fresh_42]

118 confirmed dead. How does this change France and or Europe?

CNN has already 149.
I really fear that nationalists in several countries will gain intakes. In Germany this year alone we have est. 1 million refugees mainly from Syria, Afghanistan and Somalia. These are mainly Muslims and those terror attacks don't do them a favor. Plus several countries already started to reestablish their border controls within the Schengen area. It can also not be ruled out that France will heavily strike back on ISIL which will raise the number of civil casualties in Syria, too.

 

[lordianed]

This is terrible! My thoughts go to the families of those killed .

 

[Loren]

Thoughts and prayers go out to France.

We support you.

 

[Choppy]

I was working late tonight and just caught this on the news in the car on the way home.

It's such a horrible tragedy. I had the opportunity to visit Paris once - a beautiful city. I think this hits home for so many people because Paris is a centre of culture and art. It's a destination that people dream of visiting. And a city that a lot of westerners have historical ties to.

The UN climate change conference is supposed to happen there in a few weeks. I hope that this isn't derailed.

 

[WWGD]

That sucks. Maybe Europeans, mostly the French, could gain something by studying the US case, where Muslims seem to have successfully integrated into society to a greater degree than in Europe.

 

[Evo]

I'm going to bed, but do you have any idea what the difference is in the percentage of Muslims to the overall population is between the US and France and the size of the countries?

 

[WWGD]

In Europe, it is estimated 42 million Muslims, around 6.7% of total, in U.S, it is estimated to be between 4.4 and 6-7 million, between 1.34% and 2.2%. Yes , percentage is smaller in U.S, but around 5 million seems large-enough to have an impact if there was a large percentage of alienated population, specially in areas with higher concentration. France's % is around 7 . In France, the UK, there is the additional issue that some of them come from former colonies.
Source: World Almanac and Book of Facts, 2015.

 

[Student100]

That sucks. Maybe Europeans, mostly the French, could gain something by studying the US case, where Muslims seem to have successfully integrated into society to a greater degree than in Europe.

Muslim is a pretty broad religious category. I think it might be beneficial to not look at Muslims as a whole, but certain ethnic groups.

 

[Monsterboy]

153 dead according to CNN ,maybe the ISIS(or other terrorist organizations) managed to send some of their terrorists into Europe under the guise of refugees ?

 

[Student100]

153 dead according to CNN ,maybe the ISIS(or other terrorist organizations) managed to send some of their terrorists into Europe under the guise of refugees ?

Actually: http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/619363/Islamic-State-ISIS-Twitter-Paris-attacks

Don't know how accurate that is, the last major news station still says no one has claimed responsibility as of yet.

 

[HossamCFD]

maybe the ISIS(or other terrorist organizations) managed to send some of their terrorists into Europe under the guise of refugees ?

That may well be the case. It's too soon to tell. However, it doesn't have to be, it's more likely that the terrorists were European born. Thousands of French and European born muslims have traveled to the middle east to join ISIS. The Charlie Hebdo attackers as well as 3 of the 4 7/7 bombings terrorists were born in Europe (the fourth was a Jamaican born convert). As far as ISIS is concerned, it's far easier to recruit among radicalised European muslims than go through the trouble of sending a group from the ME.

 

[WWGD]

Muslim is a pretty broad religious category. I think it might be beneficial to not look at Muslims as a whole, but certain ethnic groups.

It is a general statement. How do you suggest one do the parsing between groups? I admit I am not that knowledgeable on the ethnic distribution of Muslims and its implications. Still, something seems to have worked better in the US, hasn't it?

 

[lordianed]

It is a general statement. How do you suggest one do the parsing between groups? I admit I am not that knowledgeable on the ethnic distribution of Muslims and its implications. Still, something seems to have worked better in the US, hasn't it?

The US may have done a slightly better job, but I doubt that they have the situation under control either. I believe the Fort Hood shootings were also similarly motivated. As for whether or not the US have done a good job integrating Muslims, I feel that they have integrated better since they make up a less significant amount of the population, and they come from a variety of places.

 

[WWGD]

The US may have done a slightly better job, but I doubt that they have the situation under control either. I believe the Fort Hood shootings were also similarly motivated. As for whether or not the US have done a good job integrating Muslims, I feel that they have integrated better since they make up a less significant amount of the population, and they come from a variety of places.

There is clearly room for improvement, and yes, it is easier to absorb 5 million people into a population of 320 million than to absorb those 5 million into a population 1/5 that size, 64 million.

 

[HossamCFD]

The problem isn't Islam, and never was.

It again has nothing to do with the teachings of Islam.

I respectfully disagree. This debate of whether it's Islam or the geo-political situation in the middle east, exemplified by the Sam Harris/Ben Affleck shouting match a few months ago, always comes up after terrorist attacks. I'm reluctant to get involved since emotions are running high (understandably), but I decided to share a few thoughts.

Islam does have a unique emphasis on martyrdom, Jihad, violence, and war in a way that's different from any other religion including Christianity. There is no shortage of evidence to support this. Whether it's vague and ambiguous verses in the Quran or more explicit and clear sayings in the Hadith. The early history of Islam, as we learn from the earliest biographies of the prophet of Islam, is full with examples of the prophet and his "rightly guided successors" using war to advance the religion, advocating for the death penalty for people who leave Islam, taking women slaves as booty of war, and stoning people who commit adultery (there are also stories of compassion and peace treaties).

Now the relevance of all that to modern day muslims of course depends on interpretations and to what extent the text is seen in historical context or as a religious creed. But more importantly it also depends on the interpretation of current political events. For instance, the majority of muslims believe in martyrdom for someone who dies during Jihad, but only the terrorists would argue that blowing yourself up in a stadium in Paris is a form of rightful Jihad, whereas the majority would just see it as a terrorist attack.

It's perfectly possible not to blame Muslims in general for these terrorist attacks, since the vast majority do not condone them, without claiming that Islam has NOTHING to do with them, which IMO is contrary to the evidence.

 

[WWGD]

I respectfully disagree. This debate of whether it's Islam or the geo-political situation in the middle east, exemplified by the Sam Harris/Ben Affleck shouting match a few months ago, always comes up after terrorist attacks. I'm reluctant to get involved since emotions are running high (understandably), but I decided to share a few thoughts.

Islam does have a unique emphasis on martyrdom, Jihad, violence, and war in a way that's different from any other religion including Christianity. There is no shortage of evidence to support this. Whether it's vague and ambiguous verses in the Quran or more explicit and clear sayings in the Hadith. The early history of Islam, as we learn from the earliest biographies of the prophet of Islam, is full with examples of the prophet and his "rightly guided successors" using war to advance the religion, advocating for the death penalty for people who leave Islam, taking women slaves as booty of war, and stoning people who commit adultery (there are also stories of compassion and peace treaties).

Now the relevance of all that to modern day muslims of course depends on interpretations and to what extent the text is seen in historical context or as a religious creed. But more importantly it also depends on the interpretation of current political events. For instance, the majority of muslims believe in martyrdom for someone who dies during Jihad, but only the terrorists would argue that blowing yourself up in a stadium in Paris is a form of rightful Jihad, whereas the majority would just see it as a terrorist attack.

It's perfectly possible not to blame Muslims in general for these terrorist attacks, since the vast majority do not condone them, without claiming that Islam has NOTHING to do with them, which IMO is contrary to the evidence.

The countries where Islam is a majority religion are mostly broken down at this point. This is a cyclical thing in history; it can and does happen to all countries, cultural groups and religion at different points in their respective evolutions. Christianity has had its ugly days too, with crusades, the inquisition, it was used as an excuse to enslave people and colonize and exploit countries , etc. I think if one takes a longer-term view of Islam and history, this reveals that recent behavior is not so much intrinsic to Islam, but more a result of a culture that is currently broken down.

 

[WWGD]

Christianity is still having ugly days: AIDS in africa, death penalties in African countries. All the result from christian missionaries. What about pedophilic priests? So, if you (not you WWGD) say there is something intrinsically wrong with islam, then don't chicken out by saying these christian atrocities are the work of certain disturbed individuals.

And look at all these Christian cults in the U.S where the leader has sex with 12- 13- year olds.
In addition, many Muslim scholars helped give rise to modern science and Mathematics. I doubt there are many people in daily modern life who base their actions on reading the Koran. Your average person wants to raise their kids in peace, provide them with a quality education, make a good living , etc., when given a chance. Religion in general is often a convenient hiding place for scoundrels, where people justify their actions claiming these are supported by their gods and by their holy books.

 

[HossamCFD]

Christianity has had its ugly days too, with crusades, the inquisition, it was used as an excuse to enslave people and colonize and exploit countries

There was a time when I wouldn't have hesitated to say that Christianity is a problem. It's less so now, mainly because most Christians today don't take the text too seriously. I hope there will come a day when that's the same for Islam.

I think if one takes a longer-term view of Islam and history, this reveals that recent behavior is not so much intrinsic to Islam, but more a result of a culture that is currently broken down.

I'm not saying there aren't other factors. This is clear from the fact there are many differences between different muslim communities. However, Islamic history wasn't that rosy. Islam did have its crusades and slave trade.

I doubt there are many people in daily modern life who base their actions on reading the Koran. Your average person wants to raise their kids in peace, provide them with a quality education, make a good living , etc., when given a chance.

I have no doubt that is the case, and I always stress that people should see muslims as individuals, like any other group, who mostly have the same inspirations in life as anyone else. That's why we're fortunately dealing with 10s of thousands ISIS fighters in Syria and Iraq (with probably less than that scattered in other places) rather than 10 million.
I'm not saying that ISIS is the authoritative interpretation of Islam. But I'm saying they haven't invented this out of thin air. There is a direct link between their actions and the text.

 

[Nugatory]

There is a direct link between their actions and the text.

There is, but which way does it go? If someone approach a text wanting to find a justification for murder, chances are they'll be able to find it. That success tells us more about the person than the text.

 

[HossamCFD]

There is, but which way does it go? If someone approach a text wanting to find a justification for murder, chances are they'll be able to find it. That success tells us more about the person than the text.

I believe it tells us about both. Apart from the Quran, the text isn't really that ambiguous. I can go into details but I don't want to derail the topic so I'll just give one example. There are a few narrations of a Hadith that tells you very clearly that a muslim who leaves Islam should be killed. The language is very straightforward and the Hadith is narrated in more than one compilation that is regarded authentic by many muslims. It is not a coincidence that Saudi Arabia along with a few other muslim countries (never mind ISIS) do prescribe the death penalty for leaving Islam. Now the reason why most muslims in the world don't go around and kill anyone who left Islam is not because they don't believe in the Hadith, or because the language is vague, but rather because as most of them are sensible people they would try and contextualise the text or put it in a historical perspective that means they don't have to do it now.

 

[Monsterboy]

I can't fathom the magnitude of intelligence failure France must have gone through ,suicide bombings in the capital city ? unbelievable ! has anyone claimed responsibility ?

 

[HossamCFD]

has anyone claimed responsibility ?

Yes. Isis has. Hollande also directly blamed them for the attack.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-34820016

 

[S.G. Janssens]

Yes. Isis has.

Do you have any opinion on what could be a good strategy to deal with this garbage? It's not a trick question, I'm genuinely curious.

 

[Astronuc]

French President Francois Hollande said the violence was organized from abroad by UnIslamic State with internal help.

http://news.yahoo.com/islamic-state-claims-responsibility-paris-attacks-105251415.html

The attacks at a stadium, concert hall and cafes and restaurants in northern and eastern Paris were "an act of war committed by Daesh that was prepared, organized and planned from outside (of France)" with help from inside France, Hollande said, using the Arabic acronym for UnIslamic State.

Certainly modern technology, allows instant communication and transfer of funds. Illicit trafficking (smuggling) of anything allows weapons and explosives to move relatively easily across borders.

 

[Astronuc]

Where the attacker residents of France/EU or did they come from ISIS directly? the article doesn't say anything.

I think we have to wait for the French government to identify the attackers and from that see if their movements can be traced.

From the Yahoo article:

Foreign fighters who join Islamic State, the group which controls large swathes of Iraq and Syria, are seen as especially dangerous because Western passports enable them to live in and travel to Western countries undetected.

 

[HossamCFD]

Do you have any opinion on what could be a good strategy to deal with this garbage? It's not a trick question, I'm genuinely curious.

I wouldn't have suspected it was a trick question. Though I'm afraid I don't have any intelligent answers. However, I can share some incoherent ramblings.

I would say there's two sorts of "garbage". First is religiously motivated terrorism (and I understand that many people won't link it to religion). This can only be dealt with through security measures IMO as there's no reasoning with those people. I'm no expert on security so I can't elaborate on that.

The second kind of garbage is Islamic extremism; the wider circle of people who share many of the beliefs of the terrorists but are not willing to act on them. This IMO is more difficult to deal with. I don't think there's a solution to that apart from people becoming less religious in the long run. This is a long process that has to be homegrown in muslim communities. Promotion of science, good education, and freedom of expression are essential in this process. I'm not sure how much can the west help in this process, but certainly maintaining current levels of tolerance and inclusiveness is important; people tend to identify more with religion when they think they are being persecuted because of it. Trying to promote liberal values and democracies in muslim majority countries (however hard that might be) is also important.

 

[russ_watters]

The countries where Islam is a majority religion are mostly broken down at this point. This is a cyclical thing in history; it can and does happen to all countries, cultural groups and religion at different points in their respective evolutions. Christianity has had its ugly days too, with crusades, the inquisition, it was used as an excuse to enslave people and colonize and exploit countries , etc. I think if one takes a longer-term view of Islam and history, this reveals that recent behavior is not so much intrinsic to Islam, but more a result of a culture that is currently broken down.

While I agree with most of that, I disagree with it being cyclical. Development is not cyclical, it is parabolic. On average, the world does not go backwards, over timeframes of decades or longer. The world is, in general, a much more peaceful place than it was 50, 100, 200, 500 years ago. What is cyclical is the cycle of violence in a failed society; the violence feeds on the religious extremism, which feeds on the violence.

However, yes, the failure of many parts of the world to develop into stable, peaceful civilizations is the root of the problem, regardless of how it connects to religion. There are many areas of the world that have failed to develop (much of Africa, for example). Religion is often a component of that (and indeed, in the Crusades, christians exported their violence to the Middle East), and just because other religions have in the past had violent tendencies does not mean we should be ignoring the religious component here. Islam is a key fuel that powers the war.

I'm not sure what the solution is, but I do know that we in the West have been falling-down on the job for decades, and Europe more than the US. Europe has gotten a pass mostly because the US absorbed most of the terrorism, but ISIS appears less picky than al Qaeda.

We all, in the West though, have chosen the worst possible course of action. A minor bombing campaign feels clean and easy, but it is like gently poking a wasp's-nest with a stick: It doesn't solve the problem and it pisses off the wasps. We must either totally pull-out of the ME and be ok with letting it be an anarchic cesspool, or we must fully commit to locking-it down with half a million ground troops.

 

[Monsterboy]

I hope that this attack sends a strong signal for an urgent need of good military cooperation between Russia and NATO in order to kick ISIS out. One of the main objectives of Russia is to secure Assad's regime ,lets live with that ,leave Syria to Assad and Russia , let's deal with ISIS together ,Assad is just about Syria ,ISIS is a threat to the whole world.

 

[russ_watters]

There is, but which way does it go? If someone approach a text wanting to find a justification for murder, chances are they'll be able to find it. That success tells us more about the person than the text.

I agree and that's why I don't find the 'is it or isn't it the fault of Islam' argument useful. We're in a global Islamic Jihadist war because they say so, regardless of whether the chicken or the egg came first.

 

[russ_watters]

I hope that this attack sends a strong signal for an urgent need of good military cooperation between Russia and NATO in order to kick ISIS out. One of the main objectives of Russia is to secure Assad's regime ,lets live with that ,leave Syria to Assad and Russia , let's deal with ISIS together ,Assad is just about Syria ,ISIS is a threat to the whole world.

Agreed. We've made nice before when we had mutual threats. This may be an opportunity for reconciliation with Russia that has long-term implications far beyond the Middle East.

Downside? The Syrian people are basically screwed -- but I think they are screwed either way. They may be slightly less screwed under Russia/Assad though.

 

[mheslep]

but certain ethnic groups.

Such as?

Murray has it right in the Spectator I think:

We have spent 15 years pretending things about Islam, a complex religion with competing interpretations. It is true that most Muslims live their lives peacefully. But a sizeable portion (around 15 per cent and more in most surveys) follow a far more radical version. The remainder are sitting on a religion which is, in many of its current forms, a deeply unstable component. That has always been a problem for reformist Muslims. But the results of ongoing mass immigration to the West at the same time as a worldwide return to Islamic literalism means that this is now a problem for all of us. To stand even a chance of dealing with it, we are going to have to wake up to it and acknowledge it for what it is.

 

[mheslep]

I hope that this attack sends a strong signal for an urgent need of good military cooperation between Russia and NATO in order to kick ISIS out. One of the main objectives of Russia is to secure Assad's regime ,lets live with that ,leave Syria to Assad and Russia , let's deal with ISIS together ,Assad is just about Syria ,ISIS is a threat to the whole world.

I agree and that's why I don't find the 'is it or isn't it the fault of Islam' argument useful. We're in a global Islamic Jihadist war because they say so, regardless of whether the chicken or the egg came first.

The presumption there seems to be that, yes Putin is bit of a strong man, knocking down the odd passenger aircraft, but there exist some nebulous set of basics where we share common interests. It would be nice if that's the case, but I see little evidence that it is so. Putin's done almost nothing to impede ISIS. I think a more likely case is that Putin wants the greatest possible leverage obtainable over the west, via any means he can muster. Currently the West counts terror as the biggest threat. As posts here indicate, certainly terror groups are counted as a bigger threat than ME dictators and their pals.

For a strong man leverage does not lie in cooperation, but by threat. In the Soviet days, this was done, for instance, by positioning nuclear weapons along side murderous lunatics like Che Guevara who wanted those weapons used. And as Kasparov says about Putin, "once KGB, always KGB".

I doubt Putin counts the Global War on Terror as a major threat to his country. So, if he should gain influence over ISIS, even if by no more than leaving it alone to multiply, then it may well become his instrument to manipulate against the West.

 

[mheslep]

The countries where Islam is a majority religion are mostly broken down at this point.

A couple are, like Syria, Libya, Sudan. Most such countries are not broken, not if broken means chaos and civil war. Turkey, Iran, Morocco, Tunisia, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Malaysia, UAE, Indonesia, Bangladesh... . All are majority Muslim, overwhelmingly so, and have functioning if non-pluralistic governments and a degree of civil order.

 

[Nugatory]

Such as?

Murray has it right in the Spectator I think:

We have spent 15 years pretending things about Islam, a complex religion with competing interpretations. It is true that most Muslims live their lives peacefully. But a sizeable portion (around 15 per cent and more in most surveys) follow a far more radical version. The remainder are sitting on a religion which is, in many of its current forms, a deeply unstable component. That has always been a problem for reformist Muslims. But the results of ongoing mass immigration to the West at the same time as a worldwide return to Islamic literalism means that this is now a problem for all of us. To stand even a chance of dealing with it, we are going to have to wake up to it and acknowledge it for what it is.

"Follow a far more radical version" isn't the same thing as "support random murder".

There is no credible polling data showing that a randomly selected Muslim is more likely to support random murder than that a randomly selected American is likely to have personally committed rape, murder, armed robbery, or criminal assault - and we've managed to find meaningful distinctions between the criminal and non-criminal elements of the American population.

This is not to say that the West doesn't face a serious problem - that's clear to everyone. The question is what to do about it; bad interpretations of bad data and straw man distortions (who exactly needs to "finally admit that the Paris attacks had something to do with Islam"?) don't seem to me the best starting point.

 

[Astronuc]

I hope that this attack sends a strong signal for an urgent need of good military cooperation between Russia and NATO in order to kick ISIS out. One of the main objectives of Russia is to secure Assad's regime ,lets live with that ,leave Syria to Assad and Russia , let's deal with ISIS together ,Assad is just about Syria ,ISIS is a threat to the whole world.

Coincidentally, US, Russia and other nations discuss a plan for Syria
http://news.yahoo.com/syria-talks-begin-vienna-under-pall-paris-attacks-094454124--politics.html

As an aside, "Countries such as Iran and Saudi Arabia, which support different sides in the conflict, put aside their dispute to condemn the bombings and shootings that left at least 123 people in the French capital dead Friday."

Even Hezbollah condemned the attacks in Paris.
http://news.yahoo.com/hezbollah-chief-lebanon-denounces-paris-attacks-184742949.html

One should remember the Muslims have been the primary targets of Daesh. Daesh and their sympathizers would seem to be the primary problem at the moment, or at least with respect to acts like the attacks in Paris.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Even Hezbollah condemned the attacks in Paris.

Hezbollah and ISIL are on opposite sides, though.

 

[mheslep]

"Follow a far more radical version" isn't the same thing as "support random murder"...

"Random murder" is a straw man relevant to the events at hand, is not what occurred in Paris. It was a planned and orchestrated mass attack, and if executed by ISIS as seems obvious, it was what the perpetrators would say was in the defense of Islam. By calling the event other than what it was, ironically you serve up a case in point for the Spectator author which you would call a straw man.

There is no credible polling data showing that a randomly selected Muslim is more likely to support random murder than that a randomly selected American is ...

Nobody polls for approval of "random murder", but for actions like suicide bombing and capital punishment for apostates, surveys have long been common knowledge.

Muslim Views on Suicide Bombing.

 

[S.G. Janssens]

Nobody polls for approval of "random murder", but for actions like suicide bombing and capital punishment for apostates, surveys have long been common knowledge.

I understand what you are saying, but I refuse to judge individuals on the basis of population statistics, although sometimes it is really, really tempting.

 

[mheslep]

I understand what you are saying, but I refuse to judge individuals on the basis of population statistics, although sometimes it is really, really tempting.

The need is not for judgement on individuals based on statistics. The need is to destroy the like of ISIS, who self-identify themselves with speeches and flags in the ME, if not when attempting to enter the West.

Edit: the longer the mislabeling continues, the more difficult the problem will be to isolate:
16% of French Citizens Support ISIS, Poll Finds

 

[Evo]

The need is not for judgement on individuals based on statistics. The need is to destroy the like of ISIS, who self-identify themselves with speeches and flags in the ME, if not when attempting to enter the West.

Edit: the longer the mislabeling continues, the more difficult the problem will be to isolate:
16% of French Citizens Support ISIS, Poll Finds

From your link

Newsweek's France Correspondent, Anne-Elizabath Moutet, was unsurprised by the news. "This is the ideology of young French Muslims from immigrant backgrounds", she said, "unemployed to the tune of 40% who've been deluged by satellite TV and internet propaganda." She pointed to a correlation between support for ISIS and rising anti-Semitism in France, adding that "these are the same people who torch synagogues".

 

[Student100]

"Random murder" is a straw man relevant to the events at hand, is not what occurred in Paris. It was a planned and orchestrated mass attack, and if executed by ISIS as seems obvious, it was what the perpetrators would say was in the defense of Islam. By calling the event other than what it was, ironically you serve up a case in point for the Spectator author which you would call a straw man.Nobody polls for approval of "random murder", but for actions like suicide bombing and capital punishment for apostates, surveys have long been common knowledge.

Muslim Views on Suicide Bombing.

ISIS didn't orchestrate the attack in Paris, if fighters leave the Caliphate once they're there, they're seen as weak and cowards by ISIS. That's why so many propaganda videos of passport burning exists. Further, ISIS generally frowns upon suicide attacks, as it doesn't fit into their interpretation of Islam.

If ISIS actually had any skin in the Paris attacks, it was likely lone wolf would-be immigrates to Syria that had their passports seized.

Most of those countries Muslims are enemies of the Islamic state, and have been excommunicated from the faith by Baghdadi- therefore they're apostles that must be killed.