|
Please attempt to distinguish between extremists and non extremists to avoid starting the inevitable waste of time that is "can Islam be judged by its believers?" - KwarK |
On May 23 2013 22:53 DonKey_ wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2013 22:19 Stol wrote:On May 23 2013 22:16 Nausea wrote:On May 23 2013 22:06 Stol wrote:On May 23 2013 22:02 kmillz wrote:On May 23 2013 21:55 KwarK wrote:On May 23 2013 21:53 kmillz wrote:On May 23 2013 21:47 TheRealArtemis wrote:Full video is now out. http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4939124/Woolwich-terror-suspect-revealed-sources-name-man-as-Michael-Adebolajo.htmlTranscript. The only reason we have killed this man today is because Muslims are dying daily by British soldiers. And this British soldier is one. It is an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. By Allah, we swear by the almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you until you leave us alone. So what if we want to live by the Shari'a in Muslim lands? Why does that mean you must follow us and chase us and call us extremists and kill us? Rather you lot are extreme. You are the ones that when you drop a bomb you think it hits one person? Or rather your bomb wipes out a whole family? This is the reality. By Allah if I saw your mother today with a buggy I would help her up the stairs. This is my nature. But we are forced by the Qur'an, in Sura At-Tawba, through many ayah in the Qu'ran, we must fight them as they fight us. An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. I apologise that women had to witness this today but in our lands women have to see the same. You people will never be safe. Remove your governments, they don’t care about you. You think David Cameron is going to get caught in the street when we start busting our guns? You think politicians are going to die? No, it’s going to be the average guy, like you and your children. So get rid of them. Tell them to bring our troops back so can all live in peace. So leave our lands and we can all live in peace. That’s all I have to say. [in Arabic  Allah’s peace and blessings be upon you. Is this enough to squash the "was it religiously motivated" debate? o.O Particularly the bolded part. I think it was both politically and religiously motivated, but I don't see how you can distinguish between this and other religiously motivated attacks. What about the part I bolded? Obviously the guy was high as a kite on adrenaline and the excitement of finally getting his moment so his manifesto isn't the most rational thing ever but it starts off as an impassioned plea for isolationism and self determination. How about we include both of them? The only reason we have killed this man today is because Muslims are dying daily by British soldiers But we are forced by the Qur'an, in Sura At-Tawba, through many ayah in the Qu'ran, we must fight them as they fight us. The only reason they are here is because British soldiers are killing Muslims. I'm not denying his political motivations, but it is his religion that forces his hand in doing the deeds. How can you not agree that it is both? You haven't denied it, but I really don't know what more evidence you need to say that its both. What distinguishes this from other religiously motivated attacks? That's what I really want to know. Other religiously motivated attacks almost always comment on the decadence of western society as a whole, most of what he mentions is actually happening, not just an opinion. On May 23 2013 22:02 Nausea wrote:On May 23 2013 21:59 Stol wrote:On May 23 2013 21:56 DonKey_ wrote:On May 23 2013 21:38 Stol wrote:On May 23 2013 21:35 kmillz wrote:On May 23 2013 21:33 m4inbrain wrote:
[quote]
As i said. There's a difference between a religously motivated crime and a crime done by a religious person. So screaming "Allah (God) is great" in arabic while hacking someone to pieces was just them being religious people doing a crime, not people motivated by their religion to carry out the crime? That doesn't make sense to me, but please explain. The guys obviously wanted attention, put up no fight whatsoever AND waited 30 minutes for the police to show up. They weren't just doing a random crime, they were sending a message. Shouting "burn in hell" when killing someone doesnt (in itself) make it religiously motivated. They did send a message, and it was mainly political. Shouting "burn in hell" can be seen culturally as just an insult. However this is not what the man said. In fact why try and compare a statement that has historically and recently been used to show religious motivation to one that has been euthanized to the point of a simple insult, also put into context what he was doing while he screamed "god is great". This was very much intended to be seen as a religiously motivated crime by the attacker. Because it has already been thoroughly discussed that the term "god is great" can be used in more ways than one. The simple point is that people shouldnt make assumptions without enough information. Just like you can say "I will rape you!". Well if you say it when you just chased a woman and now youre trying to take of her pants then I guess it's pretty easy to see the meaning of it. The term can also be used (in bad taste) during a game of starcraft to tell the other person you will dominate him in the game. And by saying that you've missed the point of the whole discussion. If "I will rape you!" was a in any way considered a general expression of stress and/or excitement, then saying that alone would not necessarily mean you had any intentions of actually doing so when running after someone. Talk about not wanting to see the truth. Do you seriously believe that someone not doing something in the name of islam would yell "God almighty" while beheading a person? Do you seriously think this is just a term he uses in this case to show "stress" or "excitement"? This is hilarious. I live among muslims and I have never heard one of them yell "Allahu akbar!" so I take it they are not easily excited or stressed. And btw you could just see the stress he felt during that interview he decided to have with bloody hands and weapon in his hand. No, I believe he shouted that because of his religious conviction, but I do not believe his actions were mainly motivated by religion. My issue with your view here is that you are basically ignoring all the occurrences where the term "god is great" was used in the past to show a religious motivation for an attack on "non-believers" and then say his use "god was great" was just conviction. The entire while you provide no proof for your stance as to why you would know this individual better than anyone else in this thread.
I am not ignoring anything, I'm simply stating that one phrase alone is nothing more than circumstantial and that considering all the other things he said, he seems to clearly have a political agenda as well. There were no more proof to point at other than what has already been discussed in the thread and I was asked a direct question to which I replied saying what I think: To me it didnt look like religion was the main motivation.
|
People are used to Muslims dying, it's not news anymore. And they deserved it for being Muslim. /sigh.
The irony is the kneejerk attacks / shit gone down after the murder. It's exactly the same as what the "Muslim terrorists" have been doing back to The West . Giant circle of moronic behaviour.
|
On May 24 2013 02:39 Ropid wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2013 02:35 AcidMinded wrote:
I feel like this is a stupid situation. These two men could have yelled "Death to the robot overlords" when they killed the soldier and the amount of publicity this attack has gotten would be zero. But because they mentioned something that has to do with a religion that the Western world ostracizes and condemns as evil and violent, suddenly everyone wants to talk about it. Wake up, sheeple. There are no terrorists, only disturbed individuals who don't know how else to be heard or seen. We are drowning in our own filth and blaming that filth on a god or a book instead of the people who created it; us.
I am appalled. Do you REALLY think it would not have been publicized if there were two people cutting someone's head off in London in broad daylight while there were onlookers filming videos, and then one of the guys giving some kind of speech about robot overlords to one of the bystanders which then would be shared on the Internet?
It would have been but not to the same extent. Probably something similar to the face biting attacks they had in New York a few month back.
It's fair to say that outrage felt over this attack is being further fueled by some people who think they can make good use of it in the future, for their own purpose.
|
Think what would have happened if it was two white guys hacking a muslim in London.
|
On May 24 2013 05:18 Thor.Rush wrote:
Think what would have happened if it was two white guys hacking a muslim in London.
There'd be enormous riots targeting native whites. Minorities really have no idea how damn lucky they are the majority populations in their countries are so beneficent. Of course, in ages past minority communities were aware of their vulnerability and closely policed themselves to keep their noses clean for fear of retribution...
|
On May 24 2013 05:24 Kimaker wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2013 05:18 Thor.Rush wrote:
Think what would have happened if it was two white guys hacking a muslim in London. There'd be enormous riots targeting native whites. Minorities really have no idea how damn lucky they are the majority populations in their countries are so beneficent. Of course, in ages past minority communities were aware of their vulnerability and closely policed themselves to keep their noses clean for fear of retribution...
Dont know if this post is supposed to be serious, but anyway:http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/may/02/birmingham-murder-racially-motivated-police
Where are those riots?
|
On May 24 2013 05:31 Crushinator wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2013 05:24 Kimaker wrote:On May 24 2013 05:18 Thor.Rush wrote:
Think what would have happened if it was two white guys hacking a muslim in London. There'd be enormous riots targeting native whites. Minorities really have no idea how damn lucky they are the majority populations in their countries are so beneficent. Of course, in ages past minority communities were aware of their vulnerability and closely policed themselves to keep their noses clean for fear of retribution... Dont know if this post is supposed to be serious, but anyway: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/may/02/birmingham-murder-racially-motivated-police
I was talking more en mass retribution. Clearly there's anger, but how widespread is it? Our societies have largely moved past that point (for now). I guess what I'm saying is you're not going to see mass expulsion or impromptu mob attacks by the majority (yet).
And as for the story you linked, not nearly as sensational. These things taking off tend to rely on media coverage to fan the flames. It's a good story, but it can't compete with "Soldier gets stabbed to death and beheaded by "X" group chanting religious babble while stunned onlookers do nothing."
Never.
Also:
On May 24 2013 05:36 Maenander wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2013 05:31 Crushinator wrote:On May 24 2013 05:24 Kimaker wrote:On May 24 2013 05:18 Thor.Rush wrote:
Think what would have happened if it was two white guys hacking a muslim in London. There'd be enormous riots targeting native whites. Minorities really have no idea how damn lucky they are the majority populations in their countries are so beneficent. Of course, in ages past minority communities were aware of their vulnerability and closely policed themselves to keep their noses clean for fear of retribution... Dont know if this post is supposed to be serious, but anyway: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/may/02/birmingham-murder-racially-motivated-policeWhere are those riots? ? The article states that the attackers are unknown, a racially motivated crime is just one possibility. I don't know why it is brought up again and again to point out a perceived double standard? If there was a video of 2 white guys cutting that old man down and giving a speech afterwards public reaction would be quite different.
Bingo.
|
On May 24 2013 05:31 Crushinator wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2013 05:24 Kimaker wrote:On May 24 2013 05:18 Thor.Rush wrote:
Think what would have happened if it was two white guys hacking a muslim in London. There'd be enormous riots targeting native whites. Minorities really have no idea how damn lucky they are the majority populations in their countries are so beneficent. Of course, in ages past minority communities were aware of their vulnerability and closely policed themselves to keep their noses clean for fear of retribution... Dont know if this post is supposed to be serious, but anyway: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/may/02/birmingham-murder-racially-motivated-policeWhere are those riots?
?
The article states that the attackers are unknown, a racially motivated crime is just one possibility. I don't know why it is brought up again and again to point out a perceived double standard?
If there was a video of 2 white guys cutting that old man down and giving a speech afterwards public reaction would be quite different.
|
On May 24 2013 05:33 Kimaker wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2013 05:31 Crushinator wrote:On May 24 2013 05:24 Kimaker wrote:On May 24 2013 05:18 Thor.Rush wrote:
Think what would have happened if it was two white guys hacking a muslim in London. There'd be enormous riots targeting native whites. Minorities really have no idea how damn lucky they are the majority populations in their countries are so beneficent. Of course, in ages past minority communities were aware of their vulnerability and closely policed themselves to keep their noses clean for fear of retribution... Dont know if this post is supposed to be serious, but anyway: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/may/02/birmingham-murder-racially-motivated-police I was talking more en mass retribution. Clearly there's anger, but how widespread is it? Our societies have largely moved past that point (for now). I guess what I'm saying is you're not going to see mass expulsion or impromptu mob attacks by the majority (yet). And as for the story you linked, not nearly as sensational. These things taking off tend to rely on media coverage to fan the flames. It's a good story, but it can't compete with "Soldier gets stabbed to death and beheaded by "X" group chanting religious babble while stunned onlookers do nothing." Never.
In Woolwich, a group of between 75 and 100 men gathered at The Queen's Arms pub on Burrage Grove, where they sang nationalist songs.
Sky News correspondent Alistair Bunkall, said: "A few missiles have been thrown, glass bottles and the like. The police have been trying to surround them and charging them as well with batons."
From the op.
|
On May 24 2013 05:31 Crushinator wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2013 05:24 Kimaker wrote:On May 24 2013 05:18 Thor.Rush wrote:
Think what would have happened if it was two white guys hacking a muslim in London. There'd be enormous riots targeting native whites. Minorities really have no idea how damn lucky they are the majority populations in their countries are so beneficent. Of course, in ages past minority communities were aware of their vulnerability and closely policed themselves to keep their noses clean for fear of retribution... Dont know if this post is supposed to be serious, but anyway: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/may/02/birmingham-murder-racially-motivated-policeWhere are those riots?
Native whites getting stabbed by 'radical' muslims or just arab immigrants is also a common occurance. Happens in Sweden at least. What I meant was if it was the same situation, hacking a muslim on the street in London and getting filmed. It would be a different story.
edit: what he said:
On May 24 2013 05:36 Maenander wrote:
?
The article states that the attackers are unknown, a racially motivated crime is just one possibility.
If there was a video of 2 white guys cutting that old man down and giving a speech afterwards public reaction would be quite different.
|
On May 24 2013 05:36 Maenander wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2013 05:31 Crushinator wrote:On May 24 2013 05:24 Kimaker wrote:On May 24 2013 05:18 Thor.Rush wrote:
Think what would have happened if it was two white guys hacking a muslim in London. There'd be enormous riots targeting native whites. Minorities really have no idea how damn lucky they are the majority populations in their countries are so beneficent. Of course, in ages past minority communities were aware of their vulnerability and closely policed themselves to keep their noses clean for fear of retribution... Dont know if this post is supposed to be serious, but anyway: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/may/02/birmingham-murder-racially-motivated-policeWhere are those riots? ? The article states that the attackers are unknown, a racially motivated crime is just one possibility. I don't know why it is brought up again and again to point out a perceived double standard? If there was a video of 2 white guys cutting that old man down and giving a speech afterwards public reaction would be quite different.
I'm not trying to point out a double standard, pretty much the exact opposite. I highly doubt your scenario would result in much more than a bit of bottle throwing and some protesting, pretty much exactly like the response to the actual killing of the soldier.
|
On May 24 2013 05:45 Crushinator wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2013 05:36 Maenander wrote:On May 24 2013 05:31 Crushinator wrote:On May 24 2013 05:24 Kimaker wrote:On May 24 2013 05:18 Thor.Rush wrote:
Think what would have happened if it was two white guys hacking a muslim in London. There'd be enormous riots targeting native whites. Minorities really have no idea how damn lucky they are the majority populations in their countries are so beneficent. Of course, in ages past minority communities were aware of their vulnerability and closely policed themselves to keep their noses clean for fear of retribution... Dont know if this post is supposed to be serious, but anyway: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/may/02/birmingham-murder-racially-motivated-policeWhere are those riots? ? The article states that the attackers are unknown, a racially motivated crime is just one possibility. I don't know why it is brought up again and again to point out a perceived double standard? If there was a video of 2 white guys cutting that old man down and giving a speech afterwards public reaction would be quite different. I'm not trying to point out a double standard, pretty much the exact opposite. I highly doubt your scenario would result in much more than a bit of bottle throwing and some protesting, pretty much exactly like the response to the actual killing of the soldier.
Ever drawn a muhammed cartoon? jk ^.^
|
United States41937 Posts
On May 24 2013 02:38 BioNova wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2013 01:46 teapot wrote:On May 24 2013 01:27 BioNova wrote:On May 24 2013 00:53 mememolly wrote:On May 24 2013 00:46 Taguchi wrote:I love this piece so very, very much. Perfectly coherent, as unbiased as it can be, even spells out that 'not calling it terrorism =/ justifying it'. This better go viral. brilliant, level-headed piece of journalism Kwark. I'm waiting for...."Greenwald is an idiot!". I think the person I agree with the most is the quoted British soldier at the end of that article. "While nothing can justify the savage killing in Woolwich yesterday of a man since confirmed to have been a serving British soldier, it should not be hard to explain why the murder happened. . . . It should by now be self-evident that by attacking Muslims overseas, you will occasionally spawn twisted and, as we saw yesterday, even murderous hatred at home. We need to recognise that, given the continued role our government has chosen to play in the US imperial project in the Middle East, we are lucky that these attacks are so few and far between." Why would Kwark not like Greenwald? It was a friendly jest. He does not however like Greenwald.
I was somewhat frustrated by Greenwald when he wrote "Thatcher was a stalwart ally to Saddam Hussein and a fervent support of the Gulf War and the 2003 invasion of Iraq" or something to that effect. You can't make a list of things you don't like and tag someone's name onto it without checking to see if it's true, or at least seeing if it makes sense before you publish it.
|
On May 24 2013 05:36 Jormundr wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2013 05:33 Kimaker wrote:On May 24 2013 05:31 Crushinator wrote:On May 24 2013 05:24 Kimaker wrote:On May 24 2013 05:18 Thor.Rush wrote:
Think what would have happened if it was two white guys hacking a muslim in London. There'd be enormous riots targeting native whites. Minorities really have no idea how damn lucky they are the majority populations in their countries are so beneficent. Of course, in ages past minority communities were aware of their vulnerability and closely policed themselves to keep their noses clean for fear of retribution... Dont know if this post is supposed to be serious, but anyway: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/may/02/birmingham-murder-racially-motivated-police I was talking more en mass retribution. Clearly there's anger, but how widespread is it? Our societies have largely moved past that point (for now). I guess what I'm saying is you're not going to see mass expulsion or impromptu mob attacks by the majority (yet). And as for the story you linked, not nearly as sensational. These things taking off tend to rely on media coverage to fan the flames. It's a good story, but it can't compete with "Soldier gets stabbed to death and beheaded by "X" group chanting religious babble while stunned onlookers do nothing." Never. In Woolwich, a group of between 75 and 100 men gathered at The Queen's Arms pub on Burrage Grove, where they sang nationalist songs. Sky News correspondent Alistair Bunkall, said: "A few missiles have been thrown, glass bottles and the like. The police have been trying to surround them and charging them as well with batons." From the op.
What is 75-100 men? That's nothing. If you consider what kind of people are commiting these murders - it is laughable.
You see more protest, if the cut the govermental employees benefit by a 1%.
Why don't these radical muslims don't go back into their muslim societies?
They eat our wellfare, and as a thank you, they murder our citizens.
But we are supposed to keep calm...
User was warned for this post
|
On May 24 2013 06:01 testthewest wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2013 05:36 Jormundr wrote:On May 24 2013 05:33 Kimaker wrote:On May 24 2013 05:31 Crushinator wrote:On May 24 2013 05:24 Kimaker wrote:On May 24 2013 05:18 Thor.Rush wrote:
Think what would have happened if it was two white guys hacking a muslim in London. There'd be enormous riots targeting native whites. Minorities really have no idea how damn lucky they are the majority populations in their countries are so beneficent. Of course, in ages past minority communities were aware of their vulnerability and closely policed themselves to keep their noses clean for fear of retribution... Dont know if this post is supposed to be serious, but anyway: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/may/02/birmingham-murder-racially-motivated-police I was talking more en mass retribution. Clearly there's anger, but how widespread is it? Our societies have largely moved past that point (for now). I guess what I'm saying is you're not going to see mass expulsion or impromptu mob attacks by the majority (yet). And as for the story you linked, not nearly as sensational. These things taking off tend to rely on media coverage to fan the flames. It's a good story, but it can't compete with "Soldier gets stabbed to death and beheaded by "X" group chanting religious babble while stunned onlookers do nothing." Never. In Woolwich, a group of between 75 and 100 men gathered at The Queen's Arms pub on Burrage Grove, where they sang nationalist songs. Sky News correspondent Alistair Bunkall, said: "A few missiles have been thrown, glass bottles and the like. The police have been trying to surround them and charging them as well with batons." From the op. What is 75-100 men? That's nothing. If you consider what kind of people are commiting these murders - it is laughable. You see more protest, if the cut the govermental employees benefit by a 1%. Why don't these radical muslims don't go back into their muslim societies? They eat our wellfare, and as a thank you, they murder our citizens. But we are supposed to keep calm...
I'd imagine that it is because it's nicer to live in England and the United States rather than the countries they occupy.
Also, who are they, how of them are out there and what are their end goals? What is their number compared to the non-killing muslim population?
Don't feel like answering any of the above questions? Just wanna let loose against the brown-skins? Here are some good old fashioned nationalist chants for you!
Fuck the towelheads!
Fuck the jews! (Oh wait your country already did that one)
Hang the niggers! (Our turn!)
But no, you're right, it's us vs them.
Wipe em out cowboy.
User was warned for this post
|
United States41937 Posts
The guys weren't complaining about the welfare, they were complaining about foreign policy choices which directly impact the Muslim societies. Saying "well why don't you go there if you like it so much" misses the point of their complaint. If they went back there they would still be experiencing the things that they don't like because the things they don't like are things that we are doing in their countries.
That said I'm reasonably sure that your average extremist born and bred in Britain Muslim wouldn't have much fun in the Arab world.
|
On May 24 2013 05:59 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2013 02:38 BioNova wrote:On May 24 2013 01:46 teapot wrote:On May 24 2013 01:27 BioNova wrote:On May 24 2013 00:53 mememolly wrote:On May 24 2013 00:46 Taguchi wrote:I love this piece so very, very much. Perfectly coherent, as unbiased as it can be, even spells out that 'not calling it terrorism =/ justifying it'. This better go viral. brilliant, level-headed piece of journalism Kwark. I'm waiting for...."Greenwald is an idiot!". I think the person I agree with the most is the quoted British soldier at the end of that article. "While nothing can justify the savage killing in Woolwich yesterday of a man since confirmed to have been a serving British soldier, it should not be hard to explain why the murder happened. . . . It should by now be self-evident that by attacking Muslims overseas, you will occasionally spawn twisted and, as we saw yesterday, even murderous hatred at home. We need to recognise that, given the continued role our government has chosen to play in the US imperial project in the Middle East, we are lucky that these attacks are so few and far between." Why would Kwark not like Greenwald? It was a friendly jest. He does not however like Greenwald. I was somewhat frustrated by Greenwald when he wrote "Thatcher was a stalwart ally to Saddam Hussein and a fervent support of the Gulf War and the 2003 invasion of Iraq" or something to that effect. You can't make a list of things you don't like and tag someone's name onto it without checking to see if it's true, or at least seeing if it makes sense before you publish it.
I got you, and respectfully, he does write about incendiary topics so naturally people respond strongly to the subject matter, reguardless of topic. It after all was meant in a friendly manner, no vile.
I think his writing has harshened over time since the BOA scandal involving wikileaks. Even recently I seen you reference it reguards to the Yemeni Journo. I almost wish he would lighten up a bit, since he's smart enough to write what he intends without resorting to being so sardonic. I wonder how cynical I would be if one the largest corporations in the world targeted me specifically for a 'special project' though. I used to like Glenn a lot more, but some of the articles are even hard for me to handle, as hard as that may be to believe.
Edit:for clarity
|
Islamists kill 21 in Niger:
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/05/23/uk-niger-attacks-idUKBRE94M09H20130523
So this just happened a couple hours ago. It's not going to get as much media attention because of the location of the attack and it's not western civilians being killed. You could also say that it won't get as much attention because it's not something new to that region. If it was Christian suicide bombers, that would be something new and would therefore receive a lot more attention.
|
^So what?
These guys are obviously maniacs and are a disgrace to Islam.
|
On May 24 2013 06:04 Jormundr wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2013 06:01 testthewest wrote:On May 24 2013 05:36 Jormundr wrote:On May 24 2013 05:33 Kimaker wrote:On May 24 2013 05:31 Crushinator wrote:On May 24 2013 05:24 Kimaker wrote:On May 24 2013 05:18 Thor.Rush wrote:
Think what would have happened if it was two white guys hacking a muslim in London. There'd be enormous riots targeting native whites. Minorities really have no idea how damn lucky they are the majority populations in their countries are so beneficent. Of course, in ages past minority communities were aware of their vulnerability and closely policed themselves to keep their noses clean for fear of retribution... Dont know if this post is supposed to be serious, but anyway: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/may/02/birmingham-murder-racially-motivated-police I was talking more en mass retribution. Clearly there's anger, but how widespread is it? Our societies have largely moved past that point (for now). I guess what I'm saying is you're not going to see mass expulsion or impromptu mob attacks by the majority (yet). And as for the story you linked, not nearly as sensational. These things taking off tend to rely on media coverage to fan the flames. It's a good story, but it can't compete with "Soldier gets stabbed to death and beheaded by "X" group chanting religious babble while stunned onlookers do nothing." Never. In Woolwich, a group of between 75 and 100 men gathered at The Queen's Arms pub on Burrage Grove, where they sang nationalist songs. Sky News correspondent Alistair Bunkall, said: "A few missiles have been thrown, glass bottles and the like. The police have been trying to surround them and charging them as well with batons." From the op. What is 75-100 men? That's nothing. If you consider what kind of people are commiting these murders - it is laughable. You see more protest, if the cut the govermental employees benefit by a 1%. Why don't these radical muslims don't go back into their muslim societies? They eat our wellfare, and as a thank you, they murder our citizens. But we are supposed to keep calm... I'd imagine that it is because it's nicer to live in England and the United States rather than the countries they occupy. Also, who are they, how of them are out there and what are their end goals? What is their number compared to the non-killing muslim population? Don't feel like answering any of the above questions? Just wanna let loose against the brown-skins? Here are some good old fashioned nationalist chants for you! Fuck the towelheads! Fuck the jews! (Oh wait your country already did that one) Hang the niggers! (Our turn!) But no, you're right, it's us vs them. Wipe em out cowboy.
I'll bite!
1. If you enter into a society as an outsider (immigrant) and subsequently refuse to assimilate and become in mannerism and cultural practice completely indiscernible from the native population, you are either a tourist or an invader. You are certainly not a (insert "X" nationality).
-So, who are they? Those who don't recognize what it means to be (insert "X" nationality).
*see above
- How many? Who knows, but with the mantra of multiculturalism being chanted on every campus corner, more every day.
-End Goal? A better life. That's all anyone wants. There is no malice in their immigration. This does not however change the fact that multicultural societies are abject failures which result in people with very different ways of life attempting to mutually govern each other through a democratic process. I fully support everyone and anyone seeking to improve their lot, so long as it does not interfere with MY way of life. Then we have a problem.
2. Population question? No clue, which nation are we talking about, and are we including ALL violent crimes, or simply homicides?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
