freitasm: And terrorists didn't even bother using encryption in their comms. Encryption is not a weapon.

turnin: 

I cant see JK retracting his incorrect statement about the use of encryption in France, 
infact he has actually done what many accused Snowden and Greenwald of,
he's literally told the terrorists how to evade detection.

DarthKermit: The French police fired 5000 rounds of ammo it's reported. The buildings must look like Swiss cheese now. I'd hate to be on the clean up crew! 

Rikkitic:

turnin: 

I cant see JK retracting his incorrect statement about the use of encryption in France, 
infact he has actually done what many accused Snowden and Greenwald of,
he's literally told the terrorists how to evade detection.

 

 

 

I missed that. What's the source?

gzt: It is no surprise the numbers are higher in relatively unstable places.

But you are wrong. The answer does not indicate support for Isis at all. In fact there are other surveys that specifically ask Isis support and the numbers are far far lower. Also note the never and rarely columns. Isis are essentially an Iraqi insurgent movement and it is likely they will sacrifice many other areas to protect their core territorial gains.

The purpose of the attack on Paris is to increase hate crime and discrimination pressure against Muslims and increase foreign fighter recruitment. The biggest danger in this regard is the state of France overreacting domestically.

There have been no ethnic or nationally based curfews or deportations and in that regard the state response has been measured so far. So Isis have already been denied victory in that regard, but the French must ensure the reaction of the state remains sensible.

Fred99:

gzt: It is no surprise the numbers are higher in relatively unstable places.

But you are wrong. The answer does not indicate support for Isis at all. In fact there are other surveys that specifically ask Isis support and the numbers are far far lower. Also note the never and rarely columns. Isis are essentially an Iraqi insurgent movement and it is likely they will sacrifice many other areas to protect their core territorial gains.

The purpose of the attack on Paris is to increase hate crime and discrimination pressure against Muslims and increase foreign fighter recruitment. The biggest danger in this regard is the state of France overreacting domestically.

There have been no ethnic or nationally based curfews or deportations and in that regard the state response has been measured so far. So Isis have already been denied victory in that regard, but the French must ensure the reaction of the state remains sensible.

I don't share your apparent optimism when viewing those figures.

The hoped for answer to the question is surely 0% (that suicide bombings can often/sometimes be justified).
Of course if the question was to be about support for ISIS and their activity, support would be lower - there won't be support from shia, but look at the figure for Lebanon, and there's no such division between shia/sunni about the concept itself, so if the cause was different, then...
Yes - there's a correlation between political instability and support, but it's not very consistent - compare Tunisia and Turkey. 
And sure, support for ISIS will probably be low, but that's not really the point, there have been other causes and will be other causes in the future, the concept that such abomination is "often/sometimes justified" is embedded in to a significant minority in all those societies - it's an ongoing issue, wiping out ISIL won't solve the problem.

Of course I agree about the purpose of the attack and the need for great care in a response.  The response - so called "war on terror" since 2001 has been an abject failure when looking at figures for suicide bombing:

DarthKermit: I don't see that encryption would even be needed, provided they keep their messages deliberately vague and avoid certain words that would raise red flags.

It's in the Successful Terrorism 101 manual.