34390
Post by: whembly
People forget that France was the main force during the recent Libyan and Mali "military excursions".
Like most Western Nations, they can spank anyone around the world.
98523
Post by: LethalShade
 daedalus wrote:
You DID impress me with a show of force I didn't think France was capable of.
My own government impressed me, to be honest. They're still fighting each other over BS, though.
All the jokes come from our tendency to tactical surrendering. We're all tactical gen... CREEEEEEEEEEEED!
daedalus wrote:
You wouldn't be able to get your arms around the waistline of an average American. Unless you're into that. 
YOU LIED TO ME, AMERICA! WHERE'S MY AMERICAN DREAM?!
But jokes aside, our situation is still worrying me, and I bet we'll get attacked another time soon.
20677
Post by: NuggzTheNinja
 LethalShade wrote: BrotherGecko wrote:I can't help but wonder what would happen if the US did a similar crack down and what they would find.
Still, France you keep doing you right now.
Honestly ? Probably not as many wannabe terrorists. Not Islamic ones.
You do not seem to have a lot of alienated Muslim youths.
We had the Boston Marathon bombers, and I expect us to have many more with all this talk of admitting "refugees."
But to point the fact that these terrorists are Muslims is apparently a ban worthy offense here, so with this I invite you all to merely watch as we reap the consequences of failing to recognize a serious threat to our safety in the name of political correctness.
98168
Post by: Tactical_Spam
You know... If France declares war with ISIS doesn't that enact article 4 (i think) of NATO?
34390
Post by: whembly
 Tactical_Spam wrote:You know... If France declares war with ISIS doesn't that enact article 4 (i think) of NATO?
No... France would actually have to invoke article 4, not simple "declare" war.
20243
Post by: Grey Templar
I think the bigger question is does declaring war mean ISIS has been legitimized as a political entity?
98523
Post by: LethalShade
 NuggzTheNinja wrote: LethalShade wrote: BrotherGecko wrote:I can't help but wonder what would happen if the US did a similar crack down and what they would find.
Still, France you keep doing you right now.
Honestly ? Probably not as many wannabe terrorists. Not Islamic ones.
You do not seem to have a lot of alienated Muslim youths.
We had the Boston Marathon bombers, and I expect us to have many more with all this talk of admitting "refugees."
But to point the fact that these terrorists are Muslims is apparently a ban worthy offense here, so with this I invite you all to merely watch as we reap the consequences of failing to recognize a serious threat to our safety in the name of political correctness.
I think that implying that all Muslims are terrorists is a ban offense, not saying that the terrorists are Muslims.
20243
Post by: Grey Templar
Not all of them, but far too many of them to say "Its not Islam that is the problem here at all, nope, no way. Zero effect!"
99
Post by: insaniak
 Grey Templar wrote:Not all of them, but far too many of them to say "Its not Islam that is the problem here at all, nope, no way. Zero effect!"
Violent people will be violent, regardless of their religion. The fact that there are millions of Muslims around the world who aren't trying to kill you should be enough to show that the problem isn't Islam, but simply violent people being violent and using Islam as their excuse.
514
Post by: Orlanth
 jhe90 wrote:French are pretty active in Africa etc, just no one ever seems to notice.
Au contraire, it is definitely noticed, the French have a very good record in Africa recently.
The Uk press doesnt cover the stories though, but then it ignores most of what happens in Africa.
Been looking at the Anonymous weblogs today, part of the #OpParis movement to DDOS attack pro-ISIS websites. I wonder if they are doing more harm than good shutting off easy to monitor sites. Anyway some in Anonymous are talking about recurring reports of what they have been reading from ISIS commentators, of a planned London attack, 'at the end of November', 'bigger than Paris'.
As its on social media GCHQ will likely already be all over it; keep watching out for us please guys. Automatically Appended Next Post: Grey Templar wrote:I think the bigger question is does declaring war mean ISIS has been legitimized as a political entity?
No its just spin. The French Government are 'declaring war' unofficially, via a government statement, to show their seriousness of responce. The French Government are not 'declaring war' as in writing a formal letter of Declaration of War, with copy to the Hague and UN to signify a formal war against a hostile state.
50832
Post by: Sigvatr
Just don't take Anonymous seriously. 4chan used to host a really experienced and professional bunch of hackers, but that was a lot of years ago. People migrated to the Deep Web ever since after they had realized that they could make a lot of money offering their services.
Nowadays "Anonymous" mostly consists of a bunch of script kiddies with a DDoS tool that requires one click to use.
78869
Post by: Shadow Captain Edithae
Peter Hitchens comments on how often drugs are a common factor in the backgrounds of the sorts of people who carry out these attacks:
http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2015/11/the-use-of-mind-altering-drugs-by-terrorists-some-new-facts.html
The guy has an axe to grind regarding drugs so take with a dose of salt if need be, but the guy is right to point it out. There is a strong correlation.
The Use of Mind-Altering Drugs by Terrorists: Some New facts
I promised that I would record what I knew about the latest Paris atrocities and drug abuse, once I knew it. I will not be surprised if more emerges (though it may be necessary to search quite hard for it, so uninterested are the authorities and media in this aspect of the matter). The French authorities are still far from completing their inquiries and I am not sure we even have a complete list of perpetrators and suspects. But here is an interim summary:
We still have a very partial picture, however, some facts so far revealed bear out my view that such killers tend to come from a milieu of petty crime in which drug abuse is common.
I have so far compiled the following (some links are to French publications) about those whose names have so far been linked to the atrocities, and drug abuse.
Ibrahim Abdeslam and Salah Abdeslam ran a Brussels café closed after complaints of the stink of dope led to a police raid:
http://www.lalibre.be/actu/belgique/brahim-abdeslam-qui-s-est-fait-exploser-a-paris-tenait-un-cafe-a-molenbeek-5649c11a3570bccfaf14455b
And Ibrahim Abdeslam, according to his ex-wife, was a heavy smoker of cannabis.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3322385/Ex-wife-Comptoir-Voltaire-caf-bomber-reveals-jobless-layabout-spent-day-bed-smoking-pot-French-say-blew-mistake-fiddling-suicide-vest.html
And
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/11/18/paris-terrorist-smoked-alarming-amount-of-cannabis_n_8589508.html?utm_hp_ref=uk&ncid=tweetlnkushpmg00000067
Abdelhamid Abaaoud , the supposed ‘mastermind’ of the atrocities, is reported to have drifted into a ‘life of thievery and drugs’
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/abdelhamid-abaaoud-everything-we-know-about-the-paris-attacks-mastermind-a6738776.html
And one of the Bataclan theatre killers, Omar Ismail Mostefai, was reported to have committed ‘a string of petty offences’.What were they? I haven’t seen them detailed in any British outlet, but Paris Match lists them here. They include violence involving the use or threat of weapons, robbery with violence, breaking and entering, counterfeiting cheques… and ….
‘achat des stupefiants’ - the purchase or possession of drugs.
http://www.parismatch.com/Actu/Societe/Ismael-Omar-Mostefai-profil-d-un-kamikaze-francais-866191
What does this mean? I don’t claim to know. Conceivably, it means nothing at all, though surely the habitual use of powerful mind-altering drugs by people who then commit crimes of extraordinary horror and callousness is suggestive of something, even to the most prejudiced mind?
I just think the pattern of correlation between terrorist outrages and drugtaking needs to be investigated and noticed in a scientific and objective fashion, and examined on each occasion these events happen. It shouldn’t be left to dissenting journalists to compile such things.
98523
Post by: LethalShade
The main factors seem to be petty crimes and delinquency.
78869
Post by: Shadow Captain Edithae
And mind altering drugs...
98523
Post by: LethalShade
I don't think cannabis seriously increases chances of becoming a jihadist 
99
Post by: insaniak
LethalShade wrote:I don't think cannabis seriously increases chances of becoming a jihadist
Not specifically of being a jihadist, but it's been linked to increased risk in certain people of developing psychosis and paranoia. Mental health issues would seem to be a requisite for becoming a suicide bomber.
4402
Post by: CptJake
 insaniak wrote: LethalShade wrote:I don't think cannabis seriously increases chances of becoming a jihadist
Not specifically of being a jihadist, but it's been linked to increased risk in certain people of developing psychosis and paranoia. Mental health issues would seem to be a requisite for becoming a suicide bomber.
No, mental health issues are not a requisite for becoming a suicide bomber. Unless you want to consider deep faith in your cause a mental health issue. From the Divine Wind/Kamikaze pilots to guys in WW2 who went into a bunker with a satchel charge knowing it would be their death in order to take out a machine gun nest pinning down their buddies, history is rife with 'suicide bombers' who did not have mental health issues.
1464
Post by: Breotan
All over Facebook, my friends are linking to cute little memes saying how no refugee has ever committed a terrorist act in the USA. They mainly direct this comment at people like our Republican politicians who want to defund or suspend our Syrian Refugee program.
I'd like to leave this here... (Link only because it's really long so I'm not gonna copy/format it while I'm at work.)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3322649/The-enemy-Nearly-SEVENTY-arrested-America-ISIS-plots-include-refugees-given-safe-haven-turned-terror.html
America's 'enemies within': How nearly SEVENTY have been arrested in America over ISIS plots in last 18 months - including refugees who had been given safe haven but 'turned to terror'
99
Post by: insaniak
 CptJake wrote:
No, mental health issues are not a requisite for becoming a suicide bomber. Unless you want to consider deep faith in your cause a mental health issue. From the Divine Wind/Kamikaze pilots to guys in WW2 who went into a bunker with a satchel charge knowing it would be their death in order to take out a machine gun nest pinning down their buddies, history is rife with 'suicide bombers' who did not have mental health issues.
Context matters.
47598
Post by: motyak
So according to that article there are between 1 and 3 of the 66 who were refugees/permanent residents, and they were done for sending money/arms rather than carrying out attacks, which seems to be the thing people are trying to hang around refugees' necks. Is that accurate? I admit I'm reading on my phone while I shop so I may have missed some.
4402
Post by: CptJake
insaniak wrote: CptJake wrote:
No, mental health issues are not a requisite for becoming a suicide bomber. Unless you want to consider deep faith in your cause a mental health issue. From the Divine Wind/Kamikaze pilots to guys in WW2 who went into a bunker with a satchel charge knowing it would be their death in order to take out a machine gun nest pinning down their buddies, history is rife with 'suicide bombers' who did not have mental health issues.
Context matters.
It does, and even in the context of jihadist, mental health issues are not a requisite for becoming a suicide bomber. Never has been, never will be.
Do some groups prey on mentally fethed up people and turn them into suicide bombers? Of course. But that is not their only source of suicide bombers.
To make the statement you did implies a massive lack of understanding of the issue.
37231
Post by: d-usa
 motyak wrote:So according to that article there are between 1 and 3 of the 66 who were refugees/permanent residents, and they were done for sending money/arms rather than carrying out attacks, which seems to be the thing people are trying to hang around refugees' necks. Is that accurate? I admit I'm reading on my phone while I shop so I may have missed some.
And of note, none of them are Syrian.
82555
Post by: FacebookJunkie
The problem with the Daily Mail is it is basically a right wing hate rag. Read its stories in this context.
Another poster has pointed out that many of these arrests relate to people in the US sending money and material to terrorists.
Various hyphenated Americans have done this for decades. NORAID funding helped IRA terrorists kill British soldiers, policemen and civilians.
99
Post by: insaniak
CptJake wrote:
It does, and even in the context of jihadist, mental health issues are not a requisite for becoming a suicide bomber. Never has been, never will be.
Do some groups prey on mentally fethed up people and turn them into suicide bombers? Of course. But that is not their only source of suicide bombers.
To make the statement you did implies a massive lack of understanding of the issue.
If you insist.
Frankly, I'm perfectly at peace with the idea that I might not understand what would make someone think it was a good idea to kill innocent people in the name of their religion.
34390
Post by: whembly
insaniak wrote: CptJake wrote:
It does, and even in the context of jihadist, mental health issues are not a requisite for becoming a suicide bomber. Never has been, never will be.
Do some groups prey on mentally fethed up people and turn them into suicide bombers? Of course. But that is not their only source of suicide bombers.
To make the statement you did implies a massive lack of understanding of the issue.
If you insist.
Frankly, I'm perfectly at peace with the idea that I might not understand what would make someone think it was a good idea to kill innocent people in the name of their religion.
That's because, often times they're forced to perpetuate the attack.
84157
Post by: DutchWinsAll
Lol at trying to blame cannabis instead of Islam. Once I see Rasta's start blowing up civilians and lopping off heads, then I'll say there may be an argument there. Right now it's an asinine reason that reeks of perpetuating bs to keep the War on Drugs going.
Considering how much canna is grown in many ME regions, it's history of thousands of years of use there, the ban on alcohol, and the overall illicit nature of cannabis making it useful for funds is there any connection.
Cannabis doesn't make it any easier or harder to become a jihadi. Only one's devout belief in one's faith does.
99
Post by: insaniak
Honestly, I think the big mistake being made all over the place on this issue is people trying to make it a black-and-white 'this is the cause' issue.
Islam is not the sole reason someone becomes a jihadi. If it were, there would be an awful lot more of them.
Drugs are not the sole reason someone becomes a jihadi.
Mental health, living conditions, demographic... all not the sole reason someone because a jihadi.
Nor is this true:
Cannabis doesn't make it any easier or harder to become a jihadi. Only one's devout belief in one's faith does.
...given that we've had reports for some time now of people heading to the middle east to join ISIL despite having little if any actual knowledge of Islam.
58613
Post by: -Shrike-
insaniak wrote:Nor is this true:
Cannabis doesn't make it any easier or harder to become a jihadi. Only one's devout belief in one's faith does.
...given that we've had reports for some time now of people heading to the middle east to join ISIL despite having little if any actual knowledge of Islam.
Well, a strong belief in something is fairly necessary, I would have thought. How correct their ideas are, and whether their perceptions actually line up with reality, is an entirely different type of argument altogether.
84157
Post by: DutchWinsAll
insaniak wrote:
Nor is this true:
Cannabis doesn't make it any easier or harder to become a jihadi. Only one's devout belief in one's faith does.
...given that we've had reports for some time now of people heading to the middle east to join ISIL despite having little if any actual knowledge of Islam.
Yes, because they're the average Jihadi. Western loners with no idea of Islam are the ones fueling the jihadi armies in thousands. Not locals who learned for years in the madrassas, just apparently foreigners with "little if any actual knowledge if Islam"
Do you really believe stuff like this? The word "jihad" is an Islamic term. People fighting and dying for jihad are devout Muslims, regardless of their individual knowledge. Does an American soldier need to have a deep, working knowledge of a Constitutional Republic to be considered to be fighting for America? No.
99
Post by: insaniak
DutchWinsAll wrote:
Yes, because they're the average Jihadi. Western loners with no idea of Islam are the ones fueling the jihadi armies in thousands. Not locals who learned for years in the madrassas, just apparently foreigners with "little if any actual knowledge if Islam"
How do you get that from what I actually said?
Nowhere did I suggest that every member of ISIL was a foreigner with no idea of Islam. Just that they're in the mix... in response to your claim that a 'devout belief in one's faith' was the sole motivating factor in people joining up.
It's clearly not, and regardless of how sarcastic you get, different people are going to have different motivations.
84157
Post by: DutchWinsAll
insaniak wrote:DutchWinsAll wrote:
Yes, because they're the average Jihadi. Western loners with no idea of Islam are the ones fueling the jihadi armies in thousands. Not locals who learned for years in the madrassas, just apparently foreigners with "little if any actual knowledge if Islam"
How do you get that from what I actually said?
Nowhere did I suggest that every member of ISIL was a foreigner with no idea of Islam. Just that they're in the mix... in response to your claim that a 'devout belief in one's faith' was the sole motivating factor in people joining up.
It's clearly not, and regardless of how sarcastic you get, different people are going to have different motivations.
I notice you didn't address my other point. If not a devout belief in the cause, why would anyone join up and put their life very much in danger? They do believe, they just don't have much of a practical knowledge on the subject; but they are still devout believers. IS revels in showing the world what they do, so nobody is joining up without some knowledge of what the group stands for.
Again, does an American soldier need a vast working knowledge of American history and the mechanics of US Govt to be considered a soldier for America? No, of course not. So why do jihadis? Even if all they know of Islam is the name Mohammed, they are still devout enough to support, kill, and die for Islam, regardless by joining up.
37231
Post by: d-usa
DutchWinsAll wrote: insaniak wrote:DutchWinsAll wrote: Yes, because they're the average Jihadi. Western loners with no idea of Islam are the ones fueling the jihadi armies in thousands. Not locals who learned for years in the madrassas, just apparently foreigners with "little if any actual knowledge if Islam"
How do you get that from what I actually said? Nowhere did I suggest that every member of ISIL was a foreigner with no idea of Islam. Just that they're in the mix... in response to your claim that a 'devout belief in one's faith' was the sole motivating factor in people joining up. It's clearly not, and regardless of how sarcastic you get, different people are going to have different motivations.
I notice you didn't address my other point. If not a devout belief in the cause, why would anyone join up and put their life very much in danger? They do believe, they just don't have much of a practical knowledge on the subject; but they are still devout believers. IS revels in showing the world what they do, so nobody is joining up without some knowledge of what the group stands for. Again, does an American soldier need a vast working knowledge of American history and the mechanics of US Govt to be considered a soldier for America? No, of course not. So why do jihadis? Even if all they know of Islam is the name Mohammed, they are still devout enough to support, kill, and die for Islam, regardless by joining up.
Which only works if you really believe that these people were just going about their business, someone told them "hey, Mohammed says you should die while fighting non-Muslims", and that person then drops whatever it is they are doing, thinks "well, I guess I am Muslim, let's go kill and die", and attacks the west. They have a cause and they are devout in it, but that cause can be many different things. Which goes against everything we have learned over and over again both from Muslims that are not fighting, as well as Muslims that are doing the fighting. The fighters are Muslim, but they are also fighting for many reasons other than "Islam says so". They fight for many of the reasons that motivate our own soldiers to fight for the US: they want safety for their family, they want stability, they want to fight against enemies that attacked them. They are Muslims that are fighting, but that doesn't automatically make them fighters because they are Muslim nor does it make all other Muslims fighters. Just like the US military is not a Christian Army killing in the name of Jesus, even though the majority of soldiers are Christian.
99
Post by: insaniak
DutchWinsAll wrote: If not a devout belief in the cause, why would anyone join up and put their life very much in danger? .
Because they are promised payment.
Because they like killing stuff.
Because they are crazy.
Because they hate [insert nation/race/religion here] and were promised the chance to attack them.
Because they are forced to.
Because they felt obliged to.
Because it's all they know, and they had no reason not to.
That's just straight off the top of my head. I'm sure there are any number of other reasons that someone could conceivably join a movement like this without being particularly devout.
37231
Post by: d-usa
insaniak wrote:DutchWinsAll wrote: If not a devout belief in the cause, why would anyone join up and put their life very much in danger? .
Because they are promised payment. Because they like killing stuff. Because they are crazy. Because they hate [insert nation/race/religion here] and were promised the chance to attack them. Because they are forced to. Because they felt obliged to. Because it's all they know, and they had no reason not to. That's just straight off the top of my head. I'm sure there are any number of other reasons that someone could conceivably join a movement like this without being particularly devout.
In addition to all of that I freely admit, and I think that insaniak would probably agree, that for some the motivation is that they believe that they are "holy Muslim warriors killing and raping for the glory of Mohammed because that's what the prophet wants us to do and what the Quran says to do". But for groups like ISIS it's just not their only cause, and I feel pretty confident in arguing that it's not even their main cause.
51383
Post by: Experiment 626
insaniak wrote:DutchWinsAll wrote: If not a devout belief in the cause, why would anyone join up and put their life very much in danger? .
Because they are promised payment.
Because they like killing stuff.
Because they are crazy.
Because they hate [insert nation/race/religion here] and were promised the chance to attack them.
Because they are forced to.
Because they felt obliged to.
Because it's all they know, and they had no reason not to.
That's just straight off the top of my head. I'm sure there are any number of other reasons that someone could conceivably join a movement like this without being particularly devout.
Well, according to our benevolent new Prime Minister Moron, the reason behind foreign fighters joining is simply that they weren't hugged enough and society excluded them. 
20243
Post by: Grey Templar
 d-usa wrote:DutchWinsAll wrote: insaniak wrote:DutchWinsAll wrote:
Yes, because they're the average Jihadi. Western loners with no idea of Islam are the ones fueling the jihadi armies in thousands. Not locals who learned for years in the madrassas, just apparently foreigners with "little if any actual knowledge if Islam"
How do you get that from what I actually said?
Nowhere did I suggest that every member of ISIL was a foreigner with no idea of Islam. Just that they're in the mix... in response to your claim that a 'devout belief in one's faith' was the sole motivating factor in people joining up.
It's clearly not, and regardless of how sarcastic you get, different people are going to have different motivations.
I notice you didn't address my other point. If not a devout belief in the cause, why would anyone join up and put their life very much in danger? They do believe, they just don't have much of a practical knowledge on the subject; but they are still devout believers. IS revels in showing the world what they do, so nobody is joining up without some knowledge of what the group stands for.
Again, does an American soldier need a vast working knowledge of American history and the mechanics of US Govt to be considered a soldier for America? No, of course not. So why do jihadis? Even if all they know of Islam is the name Mohammed, they are still devout enough to support, kill, and die for Islam, regardless by joining up.
Which only works if you really believe that these people were just going about their business, someone told them "hey, Mohammed says you should die while fighting non-Muslims", and that person then drops whatever it is they are doing, thinks "well, I guess I am Muslim, let's go kill and die", and attacks the west. They have a cause and they are devout in it, but that cause can be many different things.
Which goes against everything we have learned over and over again both from Muslims that are not fighting, as well as Muslims that are doing the fighting.
The fighters are Muslim, but they are also fighting for many reasons other than "Islam says so". They fight for many of the reasons that motivate our own soldiers to fight for the US: they want safety for their family, they want stability, they want to fight against enemies that attacked them. They are Muslims that are fighting, but that doesn't automatically make them fighters because they are Muslim nor does it make all other Muslims fighters. Just like the US military is not a Christian Army killing in the name of Jesus, even though the majority of soldiers are Christian.
But do you honestly think that if they didn't have this belief system that espouses killing non-believers and indeed even commands them to forcibly convert other people that the problem would be anywhere close to as bad as this?
These terrorists aren't shouting "down with the establishment!" or "I deserve better treatment" when they blow themselves up. They're shouting "Allah Akbar!" and "Die Infidel!". That seems pretty clear cut that they are doing this in the name of Islam, not because they were treated poorly. And other factors don't explain why many terrorists are highly educated and often well off prior to turning to extremism, nothing explains those types of people turning terrorist.
The ideology attracts the disenfranchised, and it incites them to acts they would not otherwise have committed. I'd say that is a fairly clear cut causality. Being disenfranchised might have caused them to be vulnerable to the lures of extremism, but it wasn't what made them do the despicable acts. The ideology, and their conscious decision to follow it, is what drove them to that point. Otherwise the worst that might have happened is they turn to simple criminal activities, but a violent ideology came along and snagged them with some of the more violent core tenets of Islam. Automatically Appended Next Post: insaniak wrote:DutchWinsAll wrote: If not a devout belief in the cause, why would anyone join up and put their life very much in danger? .
1) Because they are promised payment.
2) Because they like killing stuff.
3) Because they are crazy.
4) Because they hate [insert nation/race/religion here] and were promised the chance to attack them.
5) Because they are forced to.
6) Because they felt obliged to.
7) Because it's all they know, and they had no reason not to.
That's just straight off the top of my head. I'm sure there are any number of other reasons that someone could conceivably join a movement like this without being particularly devout.
4, 6, and 7 seem pretty tied to their religious beliefs. 1 as well if we include the promised 72 virgins.
99
Post by: insaniak
Experiment 626 wrote:
Well, according to our benevolent new Prime Minister Moron, the reason behind foreign fighters joining is simply that they weren't hugged enough and society excluded them.
That's not just something that he's come up with out of thin air, though. It's been suggested by various experts looking into the reasons for people from western countries to get dragged into this mess.
Although there's no 'simply' about it. Turning into a murderous fanatic as a result of being made a pariah by the society you're trying to live in isn't something that happens 'simply'.
34390
Post by: whembly
Can I say I don't care what reason ISIS is using to justify their actions?
Is that allowed?
There is no justification for what they're doing... right? I mean, they did:
-The beheading of 21 Egyptian Christians in Libya
-The live burning of Jordanian Pilot Moaz al-Kasasbeh
-The capturing and parading of Kurdish Fighters in Iraq
-The slaughering of the Kazidzi
-The aborrent sex slave industry
-The Crucification
-Throwing gay men off highrise to their deaths
-and, on and on and on.
This is *more* than a religious war... this is simply an existential war in that region.
Olive branch and a letter from the west saying "my bad" isn't going to stop them...
99
Post by: insaniak
Grey Templar wrote:But do you honestly think that if they didn't have this belief system that espouses killing non-believers and indeed even commands them to forcibly convert other people that the problem would be anywhere close to as bad as this?
Yes. Violent people will find an excuse to be violent. If there was no Islam, they would find another excuse.
There are plenty of non-muslims out there in the world doing horrible things. There are Christians doing horrible things in Africa. There are Buddhists doing horrible things in Myanmar. Extremists will find an excuse regardless of the specific ideology. Automatically Appended Next Post:  whembly wrote:Can I say I don't care what reason ISIS is using to justify their actions?
Is that allowed?.
Why wouldn't it be?
I don't believe anyone here was trying to 'justify' their actions.
17923
Post by: Asherian Command
insaniak wrote: Grey Templar wrote:But do you honestly think that if they didn't have this belief system that espouses killing non-believers and indeed even commands them to forcibly convert other people that the problem would be anywhere close to as bad as this?
Yes. Violent people will find an excuse to be violent. If there was no Islam, they would find another excuse.
There are plenty of non-muslims out there in the world doing horrible things. There are Christians doing horrible things in Africa. There are Buddhists doing horrible things in Myanmar. Extremists will find an excuse regardless of the specific ideology.
Yup. Exactly.
Christians at the time of the crusaders claimed to fight in the name of god. But most people forget that people back then really didn't care about the their religion they simply did out of excuse. They did it for power, not because they wanted to serve their god.
People can blame religion for the worlds ills, but humanity would find another reason to kill each other.
20243
Post by: Grey Templar
I agree that religion in general and as a general rule is not the cause of violence. I do however think that certain religions are predisposed to causing violent acts in its believers, Islam being the best example.
17923
Post by: Asherian Command
Grey Templar wrote:I agree that religion in general and as a general rule is not the cause of violence. I do however think that certain religions are predisposed to causing violent acts in its believers, Islam being the best example.
I disagree actually. I think it is based on region. I mean the entirety of the middle east is basically made out of arid climates, (you can thank the ancient empires that destroyed all the agriculture and sowed salt into the land, Thanks Genghis!)
I believe we call this Geography Politics as people are taught things over generations and different values because of where they live.
I wouldn't blame a religion for the problems, I would blame the way people are taught about human life, and what its inclination is. The middle east has very different values compared to the West. And vice versa, Each part of the world is very unique and very different from one another. We as a people are so radically different from each other it is kind of hard to wrap our head around the fact that these people are so different from us. But where there are differences there are similarities. Infact, I am very supportative of the Muslim Culture. I find it fascinating, its people noble and honorable. This is not as some foreigner but someone who studied them for many years. (along with most religions). It may seem violent but many of its people just want piece. The Radical elements take its texts literally and not the way it was intended to be taken. Same with the Christians and their bible there are certain sections that are meant to be metaphors. Infact one part of the bible talks about not all should believe in god, as choice was given by God for a good reason or so the bible says.
The Muslim Culture and Religion is very similar to the christians but its 'newer' (in terms of age) but it follows a more borderline basis with the Jewish Peoples. (Very similar values, infact they have more similarities with each other than they do with the Christians)
Its a complicated situation. But its one that I constantly have to educate people about. The Muslim people aren't bad, only its radical elements.
As any religion has had its violent spurts at some time or another.
20243
Post by: Grey Templar
I do think regions have a huge impact on cultural development, but really the area was arid long before the Mongols came through the area. You'd be hard pressed to find enough salt to totally destroy an agricultural area that large on such a permanent basis.
Infact one part of the bible talks about not all should believe in god, as choice was given by God for a good reason or so the bible says.
Errm, I think you misread something. The Bible does say that not everyone will believe, but it never says that's ok. Its their free will, and depending on choices punishment and blessing will follow.
63000
Post by: Peregrine
Grey Templar wrote:4, 6, and 7 seem pretty tied to their religious beliefs. 1 as well if we include the promised 72 virgins.
They really don't, at least not necessarily.
4) "The US killed my family/friends/whatever because they were within the blast radius when the US launched a drone strike on a terrorist. I WILL MAKE THEM PAY."
5) "They invade our territory and interfere in our business, killing them is the right thing to do because it will get them to leave."
7) "I can barely afford to eat, my prospects for advancing in life are nonexistent, so why not keep fighting and at least make it a quick death?"
There are plenty of reasons why people would fight for a religious cause without being devout believers in that religion.
17923
Post by: Asherian Command
Grey Templar wrote:I do think regions have a huge impact on cultural development, but really the area was arid long before the Mongols came through the area. You'd be hard pressed to find enough salt to totally destroy an agricultural area that large on such a permanent basis.
Well the Mongols made it worse by comparison there is a good reason it was called the fertile crescent for a long time!
Now its no-longer that.
Errm, I think you misread something. The Bible does say that not everyone will believe, but it never says that's ok. Its their free will, and depending on choices punishment and blessing will follow.
Technically no. But in a weird way it does. Not everyone will choose to follow god because of freewill. It is not up to the christians to convert everyone. I mean the bible says its fine to doubt in the idea of god, and its fine to have doubt in your faith. ITs not like the bible was written with the intention of it being taken completely literally.
There are metaphors in it that relate to our daily life that we take as testimony and examples to live by.
They really don't, at least not necessarily.
4) "The US killed my family/friends/whatever because they were within the blast radius when the US launched a drone strike on a terrorist. I WILL MAKE THEM PAY."
5) "They invade our territory and interfere in our business, killing them is the right thing to do because it will get them to leave."
7) "I can barely afford to eat, my prospects for advancing in life are nonexistent, so why not keep fighting and at least make it a quick death?"
There are plenty of reasons why people would fight for a religious cause without being devout believers in that religion.
Basically.
You also forgot the "My homeland was defiled."
"Those Westerners did this to us!"
"They are trying to take away our culture!"
Its very common for a culture to try and think its being tossed away by a very absorbent one. You can see that within the United States. With what people do everyday, they protest and live in fear that the country they saw quickly change.
(This has alot to do with ISIS)
ISIS is in fear that the ways it treasure are going away completely because of the Dominancy and power of the Western Culture. They don't like the idea. (plus the other myriads of things)
37231
Post by: d-usa
insaniak wrote:
There are plenty of non-muslims out there in the world doing horrible things. There are Christians doing horrible things in Africa. There are Buddhists doing horrible things in Myanmar. Extremists will find an excuse regardless of the specific ideology.
ELF/ALF are blowing stuff up because of squirrels and trees, it really doesn't take much for some people. Automatically Appended Next Post:  Asherian Command wrote: Grey Templar wrote:I do think regions have a huge impact on cultural development, but really the area was arid long before the Mongols came through the area. You'd be hard pressed to find enough salt to totally destroy an agricultural area that large on such a permanent basis.
Well the Mongols made it worse by comparison there is a good reason it was called the fertile crescent for a long time!
Now its no-longer that.
Global Warming, that's why climate change is the biggest threat to our national security 
98523
Post by: LethalShade
insaniak wrote:
...given that we've had reports for some time now of people heading to the middle east to join ISIL despite having little if any actual knowledge of Islam.
The issue with French youths leaving for Syria is that most of them are uncultured and ignorants wanting to "become someone", and who did it by learning some quotes (not necessarily true ones) from the Quran and acting like fundamentalists.
To sum up, they act tough because they don't know what to do with their life.
Hell, look at Mohammed Merah, the guy tried to become a legionary before becoming a jihadist.
21720
Post by: LordofHats
Word is a lot of the people leaving the west and going to Syria aren't even being recruited. They're just being executed or turned into slave labor.
20243
Post by: Grey Templar
They probably realized the awful truth and have second thoughts but too late to turn around and leave.
98523
Post by: LethalShade
Grey Templar wrote:They probably realized the awful truth and have second thoughts but too late to turn around and leave.
Haven't a lot of jihadis already tried to leave ISIS ?
(Just woke up, not sure if this sentence is grammatically correct )
20243
Post by: Grey Templar
Nothing specifically that I have heard. But I could see some people realizing that they don't have the stomach for ISIS's brand of Islam and try to leave.
37231
Post by: d-usa
Whatever happened to all the chicks wanting to go over there to marry them?
98523
Post by: LethalShade
I still wonder why a woman would willingly join an extremist Islamist cult.
20243
Post by: Grey Templar
Because people are stupid.
d-usa wrote:Whatever happened to all the chicks wanting to go over there to marry them?
Hmm, you know the chatter about that has dried up. I wonder if its just the world moving on to the next shocking thing and it still happens or if people actually wised up and realized its not a good idea.
38860
Post by: MrDwhitey
I've read that a lot of the people who go to join ISIS are people who distrust their own governments and media representations of ISIS and think of it as pure Western Propaganda.
They're further groomed online by ISIS recruiters and eventually decide they're going to go over there, thinking it's far better than the liars in the BBC or w/e say.
When they get there, a lot of them then realise what a huge mistake they've made. ISIS has executed quite a lot of people trying to go back, and imprisoned many who refuse to fight. Not even going to go into what they do to the women.
98523
Post by: LethalShade
 MrDwhitey wrote:
When they get there, a lot of them then realise what a huge mistake they've made. ISIS has executed quite a lot of people trying to go back, and imprisoned many who refuse to fight. Not even going to go into what they do to the women.
Shh, enough with your western propaganda
20243
Post by: Grey Templar
Careful guys, we're getting awfully close to blaming the victim
38860
Post by: MrDwhitey
Honestly we're pretty stupid and impressionable when younger, and having an underlying distrust of what's told to you by western media exacerbated by a trained recruiter of "the other side", I can see how it works well.
37231
Post by: d-usa
MrDwhitey wrote:
They're further groomed online by ISIS recruiters and eventually decide they're going to go over there, thinking it's far better than the liars in the BBC or w/e say.
When they get there, a lot of them then realise what a huge mistake they've made.
Sounds a little like going to basic training...
98523
Post by: LethalShade
MrDwhitey wrote:Honestly we're pretty stupid and impressionable when younger, and having an underlying distrust of what's told to you by western media exacerbated by a trained recruiter of "the other side", I can see how it works well.
I have something better : Distrust everything.
But yeah, it works. There were four confirmed French citizens involved into the attacks.
13192
Post by: Ian Sturrock
This is good for data on the "is Islam inherently violent / are Muslims predisposed to terrorism" issue:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/01/14/are-all-terrorists-muslims-it-s-not-even-close.html
I read a report (can't find it off-hand now) partly written by a researcher who'd been interviewing captured Daesh fighters. The pattern that emerged as to why they were fighting was basically that most of them had been kids / teens during various US actions in the Middle East that had killed a load of civilians and given them a really horrific childhood, along with a sense of being outsiders with little pride or community. Daesh gave them the idea that they were fighting for 'their people' again. Hardly any of them brought up religion.
10920
Post by: Goliath
LethalShade wrote: MrDwhitey wrote:Honestly we're pretty stupid and impressionable when younger, and having an underlying distrust of what's told to you by western media exacerbated by a trained recruiter of "the other side", I can see how it works well.
I have something better : Distrust everything.
But yeah, it works. There were four confirmed French citizens involved into the attacks.
The Independent is reporting that all eight that have been identified all held EU passports
98523
Post by: LethalShade
Abaaoud, the one behind Friday's attacks, died yesterday in the Saint Denis raid.
(Confirmed by the French government)
+ Manuel Valls warns against the risk of Biological attacks. This is the only thing that genuinely scares me.
(And of course my Gas Mask is old and I'm running out of clean filters. Useless against advanced combat gas and biological threats anyway.)
21720
Post by: LordofHats
 Ian Sturrock wrote:This is good for data on the "is Islam inherently violent / are Muslims predisposed to terrorism" issue:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/01/14/are-all-terrorists-muslims-it-s-not-even-close.html
I read a report (can't find it off-hand now) partly written by a researcher who'd been interviewing captured Daesh fighters. The pattern that emerged as to why they were fighting was basically that most of them had been kids / teens during various US actions in the Middle East that had killed a load of civilians and given them a really horrific childhood, along with a sense of being outsiders with little pride or community. Daesh gave them the idea that they were fighting for 'their people' again. Hardly any of them brought up religion.
To be frank, a terrorist group isn't that different from your typical street gang or drug cartel in terms of it's group dynamics. I doubt many people get into terrorism because strapping high explosives to their chests is a life goal. They join because they don't have much else. Terrorists groups, relative to other organizations, are just a gak ton more overt in their violence and motivated by politics/ideals rather than money. Even then, lots of people find ways to get rich off terrorism. The leaders of Hezbollah and Hamas are pretty damn rich.
10920
Post by: Goliath
LethalShade wrote:Abaaoud, the one behind Friday's attacks, died yesterday in the Saint Denis raid.
(Confirmed by the French government)
+ Manuel Valls warns against the risk of Biological attacks. This is the only thing that genuinely scares me.
(And of course my Gas Mask is old and I'm running out of clean filters. Useless against advanced combat gas and biological threats anyway.)
Was he one of the two unidentified bodies then?
78869
Post by: Shadow Captain Edithae
Edit: Nevermind. Still catching up, was replying to a comment from page 21.
44654
Post by: Lone Cat
d-usa wrote: Orlanth wrote:I suggest we leave Assad alone. We were happy to before the Arab Spring, he survived the fire.
Our biggest lesson over the last 15 years should really be that stable dictatorships are better for our national interest and security than unstable democracies.
Look at Spain and Indonesia. look how do they transit from a long - reigning tyrants to Democracy.
This is a big question, Any long-reigning regime always share the same lingering problems..... "What will happen if the Leader in question passes away?" This is critical moment once the reign is coming to past. This is the best moment where the rivaling factions competing against each other to earn total supremacy (and destroy the others once and for all). Even if the old leader chose his/her successor. whether will the choices of succession respected by the interim government or will the said ruling body jeopardize the choice, does the successor posses enough prestige and charisma to earn national respect or whether will there be any rebellions? will the country delves into a civil war?
You can have safer, more stable country with a big guy ruling over it for a long long time with the less risks of terrorist cell proliferations, but you can't expect that the leader lasts forever. troughful transition plans and preparations are needed.
56425
Post by: Knockagh
FacebookJunkie wrote:
The problem with the Daily Mail is it is basically a right wing hate rag. Read its stories in this context.
Another poster has pointed out that many of these arrests relate to people in the US sending money and material to terrorists.
Various hyphenated Americans have done this for decades. NORAID funding helped IRA terrorists kill British soldiers, policemen and civilians.
I will never understand the American terrorist fund raising. I know many people in the UK were lost for words when the New York Fire Department has a fund raising dinner with guest star Gerry Adams as their main speaker two weeks after 9/11. For years people excused, as far as one can the fund raising, as American citizens had little or no experience of direct terrorism. it was assumed 9/11 would be a wake up call...
514
Post by: Orlanth
 Knockagh wrote:FacebookJunkie wrote:
Various hyphenated Americans have done this for decades. NORAID funding helped IRA terrorists kill British soldiers, policemen and civilians.
I will never understand the American terrorist fund raising. I know many people in the UK were lost for words when the New York Fire Department has a fund raising dinner with guest star Gerry Adams as their main speaker two weeks after 9/11. For years people excused, as far as one can the fund raising, as American citizens had little or no experience of direct terrorism. it was assumed 9/11 would be a wake up call...
It was. For the usual scum in the Irish American community it was business as usual, but because the UK was quick to respond to the call to deal with the Taliban the mood in the US changed.
I remember articles at the time using the UK as an example of 'how to come to terms with the reality of terrorism'. It was a PR disaster for Sinn Fein and NORAID, who quietly closed up shop. It was the wisest thing for them to do, those who are their supporters would do so silently if at all, and the funding ground would be allowed to lie fallow rather than have it burned out by public opinion in the US. In this way the UK profited from 9/11 as the Good Friday agreement was largely seen as optional by the IRA, some of the bloodiest attacks occurred since 1997, but post 9/11 they had no choice but to come to the negotiating table for real, and I for one believe US Government pressure on Sinn Fein was largely responsible for that. The Bush-Blair alliance was uneven, but we got that much out of it, and frankly that was worth the price we paid in backing US interventions.
98523
Post by: LethalShade
170 hostages taken in Bamako, Mali by 2 armed men. 2 Malians and 1 French are dead.
(Mali is an old French colony and we have soldiers there)
EDIT : French GIGN (SWAT) is coming to Mali.
44654
Post by: Lone Cat
LethalShade wrote:170 hostages taken in Bamako, Mali by 2 armed men. 2 Malians and 1 French are dead.
(Mali is an old French colony and we have soldiers there)
EDIT : French GIGN (SWAT) is coming to Mali.
French troops still station in Mali? which units do these troops belongs to?
- Army
- Legion Etrangerie
- Other (specify)
98523
Post by: LethalShade
Army. The Légion Etrangère went to Mali in 2013 and left in 2014 (Opération Serval).
I'm surprised we sent the GIGN, though. I've never heard of them intervening abroad.
7684
Post by: Rune Stonegrinder
fermentation of grain is a sin
514
Post by: Orlanth
A feeble excuse, but technically acceptable as a statement. Though targeting bars per se has not IHO been a policy but a point of conveneince.
1. Bars.especially tropical ones tend not to have much in the way of walls or doors, allowing unsupervised and unmonitored access from any direction.
2. Bars are patroned by large dense crowds of easily identifiable people, and bar clients tend to segregate. Its easy to find a tourist nation specific bar in any tourist resort town.
3. Bars are patroned by transients, and its easy for a bar patron to fit in without talking to anyone. Its easy commonplace and ok to just turn up with a backpack. Just also easy to leave it against the bar and disappear 'to the toilet' while the bomb ticks down.
4. Bars are patroned by visible drunks, who might not notice things sober people do. By approaching a part of a bar where you know you wont get attention because of the people nearest to you, a terrorist can improve his chances.
5. Bars are often covered with iconography. A tropical bar patroned by the French, Aussies, Australians etc may well have iconography identifiable with that country. It lets the world know who you are bombing without having to go through first world security.
Frankly I am surprised there are as few large bar attacks are there are. They are an ideal soft target, with 'Allah hates alcohol' being a side issue you can add for flavour on top.
67097
Post by: angelofvengeance
Eagles of Death Metal have done their first interview about the attack in the Bataclan venue on 13/11/15
There's only a minute preview here, but the full interview will be aired next week. I gotta tell ya, even for a minute's worth it was upsetting to hear them talk about it.
http://www.nme.com/news/eagles-of-death-metal/89874
1464
Post by: Breotan
We have an update.
According to the Daily Mail, Salah Abdeslam, a suspect in the Paris attacks has been captured in Brussels. Follow the link for the full article (image heavy so I'm not doing a full quote).
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3498786/Prime-suspect-Paris-attacks-escaped-police-Brussels-shoot-Salah-Abdeslam-s-fingerprints-raided-flat.html
'We got him!': Police capture world's most wanted man as ISIS fugitive behind Paris attacks is shot in raid on Brussels hideout
5394
Post by: reds8n
If we can be extra careful with which posts we quote, so we don't drag up points from last year and so on.
thanks 
50832
Post by: Sigvatr
Throw it into the deepest hole we can find on this planet and let it rot. Bonus points for making the rest of its life as painful as possible.
Good job on the men in blue, thanks for the work, effort and risk you were willing to take in order to make the world a bit safer again.
80673
Post by: Iron_Captain
 Sigvatr wrote:Throw it into the deepest hole we can find on this planet and let it rot. Bonus points for making the rest of its life as painful as possible.
Good job on the men in blue, thanks for the work, effort and risk you were willing to take in order to make the world a bit safer again.
Lo and behold! This is a rare day indeed, for not only has this terrorist finally been captured, but also I find myself agreeing with Sigvatr!
78869
Post by: Shadow Captain Edithae
I favour a firing squad.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
Thorough interrogation to find out any information possible would be a better idea, followed by trial and a suitably long term of imprisonment.
51383
Post by: Experiment 626
 Kilkrazy wrote:Thorough interrogation to find out any information possible would be a better idea, followed by trial and a suitably long term of imprisonment.
This.
Islamists want to be martyred for their so-called cause. Just throwing the pathetic wretches into a black hole and leaving them to rot from old age is a much worse fate for their barbaric kind.
Mind you, I'm also for hacking off their penis with a dull spoon first, but then, I'm also a woman so I would take much greater pleasure in this ultimate humiliation than most probably would!
Would definitely bring an added sense of justice, considering how Islamists treat women & girls in general as being nothing more than sacks of baby-pooping meat. (which under their laws apparently can, and indeed should be physically beaten & raped into submission, because... "reasons".)
34390
Post by: whembly
We calling for waterboarding-scale interrogation?
Why not simply put him in prison, just like any other convicts. But, if he doesn't cooperate during interrogation, deny him his religious tenets. Feed him only pork products. etc...
He's a radicalized believer...
50512
Post by: Jihadin
Let's not get involve with the interrogation process in France Whembly. They already know what not to do after the US example 
20243
Post by: Grey Templar
Forced conscription working on a pork farm! Make me delicious bacon you fiend!
38860
Post by: MrDwhitey
He'll make the special sauce just for you Grey.
On topic, I would say interrogation followed by a very, very, very long time in a cell. None of this torture bs, we're not them.
1464
Post by: Breotan
Kilkrazy wrote:Thorough interrogation to find out any information possible would be a better idea, followed by trial and a suitably long term of imprisonment.
Maybe he can bunk with Breivik.
28848
Post by: KamikazeCanuck
Traditionally, firing squads are for soldiers. Criminals like this should be hanged.
84405
Post by: jhe90
Just lock him in solitary for rest of life.
He,d start angry but break as hw relises he would never see human contact outside his jailors and neve see anything but concrete walls.
No freedom, just soul destroying imprisonment
100624
Post by: oldravenman3025
The death penalty is the only logical course to take when dealing with animals like this. The world would be better off without them.
50512
Post by: Jihadin
Risk making this individual a Martyr eh
Life Imprisonment so he can die of natural cause thereby denying him Paradise
78869
Post by: Shadow Captain Edithae
 Jihadin wrote:Risk making this individual a Martyr eh Life Imprisonment so he can die of natural cause thereby denying him Paradise
The problem is, a "Life sentence" rarely means life these days. The concept of a Life sentence has been so undermined and its reputation tarnished over the years due to high profile murderers being released after a couple of decades or on compassionate grounds that I simply cannot There has to be a legally binding irrevocable clause of no chance for parole ever, and no chance of compassionate parole ever (for instance, I don't think a mass murderer such as the Lockerbie bomber should be released simply because he develops cancer), for a Life sentence to be a meaningful alternative to a death penalty. A genuine Life sentence should be a de facto death sentence - you are being sentenced to live out the rest of your life in prison until the day you die, no matter what happens (besides exoneration, obviously).
50512
Post by: Jihadin
Solitary though. I highly doubt they put that nutter in with the General Population
78869
Post by: Shadow Captain Edithae
Jihadin wrote:Solitary though. I highly doubt they put that nutter in with the General Population
If the isolation drives him mad, I can live with that.
4001
Post by: Compel
I think that ship has already sailed, Edithae...
78869
Post by: Shadow Captain Edithae
Well, I mean drive him "insane" by the mans own standards.
We might know he's already insane, but I want him to feel that he's losing his sanity. That means almost total de-humanization, and lack of human contact besides basic interactions with his jailors and a couple hours a hour day outside solitary confinement for exercise.
76888
Post by: Tyran
He is already a de-humanized crazed monster, and a religious radical one.
50512
Post by: Jihadin
The goal is to deny him the Paradise option by keeping him alive then to make him a Martyr and "Justification" to enter Paradise by executing him.
7361
Post by: Howard A Treesong
Unbelievable, not only will it take months to fight the extradition to the country next door, but he wants to die the French for 'breaching his confidentiality' when they revealed some of his murderous intentions. It's an obvious abuse of the system designed by his lawyer to jam proceedings.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-35855032
Let him sue after he's found innocent.
84405
Post by: jhe90
Lock him up till the very walls of his cell become his entire universe.
Soul crushing universe of no concerete and steel.
98523
Post by: LethalShade
Good. Glad to see he's finally been caught. I hope we'll be able to get useful information from him.
68764
Post by: Killionaire
Interesting how rapidly the conversation of the crowd here strays away from 'justice' and 'public safety' into 'unnecessary torture and humiliation'.
Really? Feeding him pork products or letting other criminals have him? Is that really what a civilization does, as opposed to just executing or locking away these people forever after seeing what intelligence can be gained?
18698
Post by: kronk
Question him, then lock him up forever. That's all of the attention he deserves.
78973
Post by: Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl
 Killionaire wrote:Interesting how rapidly the conversation of the crowd here strays away from 'justice' and 'public safety' into 'unnecessary torture and humiliation'.
If at least it was from people blinded by grief. But I don't think so, not so many French flag to be seen.
I hope they'll squeeze as many information as possible out of him, and they manage to make this dissuade as many people as possible from doing terror attack.
Also I hope Islamism as an ideology will soon get killed off and nobody will ever think of trying to enforce the laws of Islam on themselves or others. Or any religious law, for that matter.
98523
Post by: LethalShade
 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Also I hope Islamism as an ideology will soon get killed off and nobody will ever think of trying to enforce the laws of Islam on themselves or others. Or any religious law, for that matter.
I'm afraid it's a very, very optimistic hope.
76888
Post by: Tyran
People still try to teach creationism in some places in the developed world, so yeah, very optimistic hope.
23
Post by: djones520
 Tyran wrote:People still try to teach creationism in some places in the developed world, so yeah, very optimistic hope.
Because creationism is on the same scale as Shariah Law...
76888
Post by: Tyran
 djones520 wrote: Tyran wrote:People still try to teach creationism in some places in the developed world, so yeah, very optimistic hope.
Because creationism is on the same scale as Shariah Law...
It's pretty much the same idea:"my beliefs are the true ones and everyone should follow them".
68355
Post by: easysauce
Tyran wrote: djones520 wrote: Tyran wrote:People still try to teach creationism in some places in the developed world, so yeah, very optimistic hope.
Because creationism is on the same scale as Shariah Law...
It's pretty much the same idea:"my beliefs are the true ones and everyone should follow them".
That's a pretty broad brush, many non religious, non harmful ideals fall into that category.
The delineating factor is not people trying to teach a certain belief/value that is factually incorrect, it is teaching beliefs/values that promote violence, unequal status for women/infidels/ect and other human rights violations.
23
Post by: djones520
Exactly. It's putting your standard sunday school teachings on the same level as what ISIS uses to justify genocide, and that is ridiculous.
76888
Post by: Tyran
 easysauce wrote: Tyran wrote: djones520 wrote: Tyran wrote:People still try to teach creationism in some places in the developed world, so yeah, very optimistic hope.
Because creationism is on the same scale as Shariah Law...
It's pretty much the same idea:"my beliefs are the true ones and everyone should follow them".
That's a pretty broad brush, many non religious, non harmful ideals fall into that category. The delineating factor is not people trying to teach a certain belief/value that is factually incorrect, it is teaching beliefs/values that promote violence, unequal status for women/infidels/ect and other human rights violations.
The point is that people still try to force on others religious ideas in the developed world, first fix that and then you may consider fixing the developing and undeveloped worlds. As I said, it is a very optimistic hope.
78973
Post by: Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl
No, but it is certainly a pretty good sign that obscurantism is hard to eradicate .
Well, Albania managed to do it pretty damn well, maybe the U.S. will catch up too .
50832
Post by: Sigvatr
Tyran wrote:
The point is that people still try to force on others religious ideas in the developed world, first fix that and then you may consider fixing the developing and undeveloped worlds.
As I said, it is a very optimistic hope.
People try to force their opinion on others pretty much with everything, religion is just one example.
1464
Post by: Breotan
Update!!
The BBC is reporting that the remaining key suspect in November's attack in Paris has been arrested.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36000407
18698
Post by: kronk
Good.
|
|
