Female Police officer stabbed to death in France

Marco23d

Marco23d wrote: »

Plenty of uneducated idiots on this thread blaming terror attacks on the Quran rather than the devastation of many Muslim countries in the middle east and Africa by the west.

'uneducated idiots'. You sound reasonable. 'The West' has heaped misery on many parts of the Globe, yet it is the majority Muslim regions that have this huge terrorist problem not seen on a scale anywhere else. Does the West have a portion of the blame for creating conditions that can lead to radicalisation? Yes, however the Quran, and as a result Islam itself, is a major issue due to the devotion that even moderate Muslims show to their religion, and many Muslims willingness to threaten and/or carry out violent actions, or to support such violence.

Not one country with a sizeable Muslim population has been unscathed by Islamic extreminism. There is a reason for this. The Quran absolutely is part, and a large part, of the problem.

Overheal

Hhhhh wrote: »

'uneducated idiots'. You sound reasonable. 'The West' has heaped misery on many parts of the Globe, yet it is the majority Muslim regions that have this huge terrorist problem not seen on a scale anywhere else. Does the West have a portion of the blame for creating conditions that can lead to radicalisation? Yes, however the Quran, and as a result Islam itself, is a major issue due to the devotion that even moderate Muslims show to their religion, and many Muslims willingness to threaten and/or carry out violent actions, or to support such violence.

Not one country with a sizeable Muslim population has been unscathed by Islamic extreminism. There is a reason for this. The Quran absolutely is part, and a large part, of the problem.

So what's easier to solve here sounds like the Western influence on the Middle East. Perhaps we should stop giving them the environment to radicalize, rather than kicking the ocean for all the good it would do of us to expect to have an entire religion go under some kind of coerced renaissance?

Mad_maxx

Marco23d wrote: »

Plenty of uneducated idiots on this thread blaming terror attacks on the Quran rather than the devastation of many Muslim countries in the middle east and Africa by the west.

much of South America was meddled with by the United States yet you dont see too many jihadis emerging from Nicaragua etc ?

I wonder why that is now

Overheal

Mad_maxx wrote: »

much of South America was meddled with by the United States yet you dont see too many jihadis emerging from Nicaragua etc ?

I wonder why that is now

How many jihadis were emerging before the involvement of other world powers? Perhaps we should have just left the hell alone.

Marco23d

Marco23d wrote: »

Plenty of uneducated idiots on this thread blaming terror attacks on the Quran rather than the devastation of many Muslim countries in the middle east and Africa by the west.

Which countries did Sweden "destroy" to warrant a terrorist attack?

Timberrrrrrrr

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Which countries did Sweden "destroy" to warrant a terrorist attack?

Are you claiming Sweden didn't send troops to the ME?

biko

That doesn't appear to be what he's claiming.
He responded to the claim Sweden devastated Muslim countries and thus it was ok for an Uzbek to drive a lorry down a busy street killing children.



On topic, does anyone have any new info on the actual attack in France?

Timberrrrrrrr

biko wrote: »

That doesn't appear to be what he's claiming.
He responded to the claim Sweden devastated Muslim countries and thus it was ok for an Uzbek to drive a lorry down a busy street killing children.



On topic, does anyone have any new info on the actual attack in France?

Who made this claim?

Sweden has troops all over the middle east, while they may not be dropping bombs they are training forces over there, therefore they are seen by the likes of ISIS as legitimate targets because they would be considered collaborators.

ek motor

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Who made this claim?

Sweden has troops all over the middle east, while they may not be dropping bombs they are training forces over there, therefore they are seen by the likes of ISIS as legitimate targets because they would be considered collaborators.

Personally I wouldn't be reaching for excuses for these folk . Sweden has long had an ultra liberal attitude to migration and is now reaping what it has sown .

They have destroyed large parts of cities such as Stockholm and Malmo all in the name of virtue signalling.

Timberrrrrrrr

ek motor wrote: »

Personally I wouldn't be reaching for excuses for these folk . Sweden has long had an ultra liberal attitude to migration and is now reaping what it has sown .

They have destroyed large parts of cities such as Stockholm and Malmo all in the name of virtue signalling.

I'm not excusing anyone, I would happily see every terrorist wiped from the face of the earth. What I am doing is understanding why they commit these acts, Irish people of all should get why ISIS see Sweden as a legitimate target.

jmreire

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

I'm not excusing anyone, I would happily see every terrorist wiped from the face of the earth. What I am doing is understanding why they commit these acts, Irish people of all should get why ISIS see Sweden as a legitimate target.

There's no discrimination with isis...they want all "Unbelievers " dead or converted, and that includes even Shia Muslims, where ever they may be, even in Ireland. And whenever and where ever they get the chance, they have been and are killing them.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

biko wrote: »

That doesn't appear to be what he's claiming.
He responded to the claim Sweden devastated Muslim countries and thus it was ok for an Uzbek to drive a lorry down a busy street killing children.

No, he didn't.

It was claimed it was to stop Sedish military training in Iraq.

Sweden hasn't "devasted" anything - nor has anyone ever made this claim.

On topic, does anyone have any new info on the actual attack in France?

You're the one trawling the internet for anti-Islam ammo, so if you can't find it I'm guessing no one else can.

jmreire

Marco23d wrote: »

Plenty of uneducated idiots on this thread blaming terror attacks on the Quran rather than the devastation of many Muslim countries in the middle east and Africa by the west.

Since the 6th century, and the arrival of Muhammad, war has been in the DNA of Islam. Most of the rapid expansion of Islam can be attributed to war. And after Mohammads death,when Islam was split in two ( Shia V Sunni,) they have been at war, even to the present day. The west were not the cause of the Iran-Iraq war, or the war in Yemen either. And if the west had never become involved on the middle east, do you seriously think that it would be all peace and quiet in that part of the world? Or that the Quran has not played any part in this???

Danzy

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

I'm not excusing anyone, I would happily see every terrorist wiped from the face of the earth. What I am doing is understanding why they commit these acts, Irish people of all should get why ISIS see Sweden as a legitimate target.

We do get it. Sweden has very sexually relaxed attitudes, enjoy music, drink, drugs, partying, homosexuality is completely fine, they are largely an atheist society.

Isis are very clear on the why.

You want to bring your own agenda in and ignore there's.

That's more than a bit arrogant.

They don't view the world through your lens, don't apply your analysis. They have their own moral codes, values and thought structures, ones that were formed and codified before a Viking ever sailed west to hit Lindisfarne.

They are capable of making choices based on the above, to advance their own agenda. Not everything they do or think is reaction to the West.

If they were mostly White, would you think as you do. I suspect not.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Danzy wrote: »

We do get it. Sweden has very sexually relaxed attitudes, enjoy music, drink, drugs, partying, homosexuality is completely fine, they are largely an atheist society.

On that basis, the other Scandinavians countries are probably a lot bigger targets.

Isis are very clear on the why.

To the best of my knowledge, they've never stated anything of the sort.

There have been four terrorist attacks in Sweden in the last ten years, two with right-wing extremists, one was a lone wolf (discussed above) and the other was in responce to an artist who depicted the prohpet Mohammed. It was ordered by Al-Qaeda and ultimately failed.

None were ISIS ordered.

If they were mostly White, would you think as you do. I suspect not.

Four of the last six people to carry out a terror attack in Sweden were white.

biko

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

There have been four terrorist attacks in Sweden in the last ten years, two with right-wing extremists, one was a lone wolf (discussed above) and the other was in responce to an artist who depicted the prohpet Mohammed. It was ordered by Al-Qaeda and ultimately failed.

None were ISIS ordered.
Four of the last six people to carry out a terror attack in Sweden were white.

If we look at Wikipedias page on terrorism in Sweden but only include attacks with deaths and injuries:

11 December 2010 Islamic bombing, only the bomber died.
22 October 2015 School attack: racist extremist attack - 4 dead, 1 in jury.
Nov 2016, Jan 2017 Nazi bombings of left-wing café and two refugee centres - 1 injury.
7 April 2017 Islamic Truck attack - 5 dead, 14 injured.

The person who depicted Mohammed have had police protection since 2010 and cannot live with his fiancée as the police keeps moving him around so the Islamists cannot get a fix on him.
Imagine that, an unknown amount of immigrated people in your own country wants you dead so the police have to keep moving you around.

Marco23d

The posts on this thread are unbelievable, I'm not even going to argue with the likes of this misplaced hatred towards Islamic culture I'll leave you lot to it.

I'm sure the vast majority of people in Ireland don't think like this and it's just people have found a thread about a terror attack to let out their hatred.

biko

Yes, if everyone agreed on everything then things would be great. But out there in the real world that doesn't happen unfortunately, and some will even kill you for no other reason than you are standing there.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

biko wrote: »

If we look at Wikipedias page on terrorism in Sweden but only include attacks with deaths and injuries:

11 December 2010 Islamic bombing, only the bomber died.
22 October 2015 School attack: racist extremist attack - 4 dead, 1 in jury.
Nov 2016, Jan 2017 Nazi bombings of left-wing café and two refugee centres - 1 injury.
7 April 2017 Islamic Truck attack - 5 dead, 14 injured.

Wrong again, it does, section 4.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_Sweden

Overheal

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Wrong again, it does, section 4.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_Sweden

Indeed


Note however Sevigin was likely radicalized by ISIS.

In June 2015, a member of Sevigin's family called police to say that he had gone missing.[2][1] Shortly thereafter Sevigin traveled to Turkey twice, both times he was deported by Turkish authorities on suspicion of intending to join ISIS in Syria.[2][1] He is known to have downloaded ISIS propaganda and bomb-making instructions.[1]

Then again you did say Four of the last six people to carry out a terror attack in Sweden were white, not 4 of 4.

biko

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Wrong again, it does, section 4.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_Sweden

Wrong about what? I didn't state anything.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

biko wrote: »

Wrong about what? I didn't state anything.

Yeah, misread the post -apologies. I thought you said it doesn't say who carried out the attacks.

But my point still stands: terrorists in Sweden are twice as likley to be white as they are Islamic.

jmreire

Marco23d wrote: »

The posts on this thread are unbelievable, I'm not even going to argue with the likes of this misplaced hatred towards Islamic culture I'll leave you lot to it.

I'm sure the vast majority of people in Ireland don't think like this and it's just people have found a thread about a terror attack to let out their hatred.

Its an amazing thing really, that people who are anti radical Islam ( same as 99% ) of muslims, always get lumped into the hate Muslims and Islamophobia camp. If you ever have contact with radical Islam ( and you survive the experience) it might just change you mind, and you will see that criticism and discussion is justified, and there is a big difference between radical Islam and the majority of Muslims,,,and they hate radical Islam too. Believe me ( or not as you wish ) but my Muslim friends would cheerfully kill any isis or al quaeda operatives they came across. And be very happy to do so.

Marcos

jmreire wrote: »

There's no discrimination with isis...they want all "Unbelievers " dead or converted, and that includes even Shia Muslims, where ever they may be, even in Ireland. And whenever and where ever they get the chance, they have been and are killing them.

ISIS have been very clear about why they hate the west, and invading Muslim lands is far down the list. These are their own words, they list six reasons why they wage jihad against the west.

1. Because you are disbelievers
   
2. Because you are liberal
   
3. Because some of you are atheist
   
4. For your crimes against Islam
   
5. For your crimes against Muslims
   
6. For invading our lands

It reads: "What’s important to understand here is that although some might argue that your foreign policies are the extent of what drives our hatred, this particular reason for hating you is secondary, hence the reason we addressed it at the end of the above list.

"The fact is, even if you were to stop bombing us, imprisoning us, torturing us, vilifying us, and usurping our lands, we would continue to hate you because our primary reason for hating you will not cease to exist until you embrace Islam."

Danzy

Marcos wrote: »

ISIS have been very clear about why they hate the west, and invading Muslim lands is far down the list. These are their own words, they list six reasons why they wage jihad against the west.

1. Because you are disbelievers
   
2. Because you are liberal
   
3. Because some of you are atheist
   
4. For your crimes against Islam
   
5. For your crimes against Muslims
   
6. For invading our lands

They do not know what they want or why they act so.

I refer you to thread's like this for the fuller picture.

Middle class activists have the real story.

jmreire

Marcos wrote: »

ISIS have been very clear about why they hate the west, and invading Muslim lands is far down the list. These are their own words, they list six reasons why they wage jihad against the west.

1. Because you are disbelievers
   
2. Because you are liberal
   
3. Because some of you are atheist
   
4. For your crimes against Islam
   
5. For your crimes against Muslims
   
6. For invading our lands

Yes, Marcos Thats it. 100%. And I do not blame Muslims for being angry with the west. Its more than justified. But yet, in my travels, I have heard very little critism or animosity from the Muslims that I met about blaming the west.. Actually, they are more angry against their own corrupt Governments. And corruption is endemic in the middle east.Everything is tainted by it.. even simple everyday transactions.....and God Forbid, you would ever need an official document.
If isis had not been stopped (and bear in mind that it took years to do that, even with multiple army contingents from different Countrys, airpower, tanks and heavy weapons.etc ) The next goal was Rome, and the destruction of the Vatican. So they posed a real threat and they still do, even fragmented .
But even without the justification of the Wests ugly history here, they would still target the west. Its their sole reason and justufication for their existance.

Overheal

But if you take out

Because you are disbelievers
Because you are liberal
Because some of you are atheist
For your crimes against Islam
For your crimes against Muslims
For invading our lands

These, then they have a lot less to recruit from.

They may try to "4D Chess" their way out of that by saying that's not their chief motivator, but it's the one thing keeping them most afloat as an extremist movement. Though yes I'm sure the leadership of ISIS loves its position, loves the power and control, and would actively continue to provoke acts of 4 5 6 to keep their house of cards going.

jmreire

Overheal wrote: »

But if you take out

Because you are disbelievers
Because you are liberal
Because some of you are atheist
For your crimes against Islam
For your crimes against Muslims
For invading our lands

These, then they have a lot less to recruit from.

They may try to "4D Chess" their way out of that by saying that's not their chief motivator, but it's the one thing keeping them most afloat as an extremist movement. Though yes I'm sure the leadership of ISIS loves its position, loves the power and control, and would actively continue to provoke acts of 4 5 6 to keep their house of cards going.

They recruited world wide as being the purist form of Islam and they got recruits world wide looking for that. Even from Ireland. But the majority of their ranks were filled with poor unemployed and uneducated people, who for the most part hated their own Government and were lured by the promise of wealth and status. And these people are easily managed.

biko

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Yeah, misread the post -apologies. I thought you said it doesn't say who carried out the attacks.

But my point still stands: terrorists in Sweden are twice as likley to be white as they are Islamic.

No probs.

Your point doesn't stand because white and Islamic isn't opposites.
In fact one of the most know Islamists was a white Swedish convert, Mikael Skramo. Mikael had 7 children that he orphaned and that was left in caliphate after he was killed in Baghouz.
The children are now in Sweden under the care of their white grandmother Umm Hamza, known IS recruiter "The Slaughterer", so they will turn out just fine...

Even in Ireland the most famous IS terrorist is white, Lisa Smith.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

biko wrote: »

No probs.

Your point doesn't stand because white and Islamic isn't opposites.
In fact one of the most know Islamists was a white Swedish convert, Mikael Skramo. Mikael had 7 children that he orphaned and that was left in caliphate after he was killed in Baghouz.
The children are now in Sweden under the care of their white grandmother Umm Hamza, known IS recruiter "The Slaughterer", so they will turn out just fine...

Even in Ireland the most famous IS terrorist is white, Lisa Smith.

True, but in my defence it was Danzy who said "white" - I was just following on.

But the point is: they are more likely NOT going to be Islamic radicals.