|
On December 16 2014 06:36 Belisarius wrote:"Global security expert" on ABC Show nested quote +Look, when hostages die, it's botched, OK. This is not a clean operation. This happens all the time when you go to rescue people. Sometimes you do it and sometimes you don't. I'm just wondering why they waited so long if they knew this was going to be lethal force.
[...]
I think in a situation like this, if it is going to end sooner or later, I would like to see it end sooner. The police were in a position to do something earlier, I don't know if he wants to go into the Lindt Cafe. But you had overwhelming police presence and when you look at the outcome, you think to yourself, 'well could it have been cleaner than this?' I think it could have been. Have to wonder if he's right.
they probably didnt know if he had explosives when the snipers had a clean shot.
And he he released or lost a lot of hostages during the next hours, so they didnt want to take their chances when it was going relatively well.
But after the last hostages fled, he broke and started shooting, so now they were forced to go in and they probably saved a lot of people with the flash grenades.
The only experts being qualified to comment are the ones who were there, everything else is just making up stories and trying to stir shit up to get viewers.
Very easy to blame the special forces now, but what if the snipers took him out and he had explosives in his bag.
It wasnt unreasonable to think that they could end this without anyone dying, he was an amateur and clearly tried to get out if it, why else would he stay there 16 hours doing nothing but losing hostages.
|
There's a lot of blame we can assign here.
We can assign it to the AFP for not handling it in a cleaner fashion, which was certainly possible, though I imagine any situation involving a nutty gunman is going to be problematic at best.
We can assign it to justice system for letting him out on bail despite like 40 (40? what?) sexual assault charges and being an accessory to his wife's murder
We can assign it the ability to get guns on the Sydney Black Market.
Maybe it's Islamic States' fault for being a pack of nutty murderous bastards that inspire nutty murderers.
Pick whichever you feel is best.
|
I don't really want to put any blame anywhere but it has to be considered whether people (apparently) taking it on themselves to free themselves instead of waiting until the Police were ready to act, could have contributed to the ending.
Which leads into whether the news reporting that other hostages had escaped had emboldened some of the hostages to attempt their own escape instead of just waiting for him to nod off and let the police do their job.
|
Criminal nobody just wants to attach himself to some cause to prove to everybody that he is important. He does not deserve all this attention.
In regards to why it took a long time for the police to act is because the longer the situation drags on, the more it wears down the hostage taker after the adrenaline has gone, and the more likely it is that he will surrender. But the absolute red line when police has to act is when the hostage taker starts shooting hostages. Which happened here unfortunately.
|
Norway28736 Posts
On December 16 2014 07:16 Yuljan wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2014 01:30 ahswtini wrote:On December 16 2014 01:27 Oktyabr wrote:
Given that virtually every psycho who has done terror acts has actually shown an obvious inclination prior to committing the act, is there any way the respective governments could have actually stopped this from happening? Like removing citizenship and barring entry? it's the tradeoff for not having a police-state. like i said before, pretty much all of these self-styled jihadists in the west have been known to the authorities, it's not a failure of intelligence, more a failure to act. Too much racism accusation if you arrest them before they have done something. We cant even arrest people who bring ammunition to IS in Germany. Someday politicians will have to realize thats its not just 5-10 terrorists but more like 1-5k + 100k sympathisers in Germany alone.
I'm sorry, how come you guys have 5000 terrorists (by you using IS, I assume you're talking about muslims as well) yet like, not a single islamic terrorist attack?
Or maybe I'm wrong and you've had one or two that somehow skipped my radar, but that's still terribly inefficient for 5000 people. Either way it is remarkable.
|
On December 16 2014 08:27 GreenHorizons wrote:
I don't really want to put any blame anywhere but it has to be considered whether people (apparently) taking it on themselves to free themselves instead of waiting until the Police were ready to act, could have contributed to the ending.
Which leads into whether the news reporting that other hostages had escaped had emboldened some of the hostages to attempt their own escape instead of just waiting for him to nod off and let the police do their job.
Im sure you would sit there when some muslim nutjob has taken you hostage and could start with the traditional IS public beheading at any point, or just shoot you, or explode for his 70 virgins.
|
On December 16 2014 06:59 ahswtini wrote:
global security expert, eh? the iranian embassy siege that was broken by the british sas resulted in the death of one hostage during the assault, but that was hardly a botched operation was it?
6 armed men in an embassy vs 1 crazy guy in a coffee shop. It's not remotely comparable and even then the 1 guy managed to kill more hostages than 6 did. That said I'm not really surprised we suck at this sort of thing, it's not like we have many hostage situations.
|
On December 16 2014 07:16 Yuljan wrote:
Too much racism accusation if you arrest them before they have done something.
Not arresting people before they have actually done something isn't "being afraid of racism-accusations" it's the principle on which our legal system is founded. If you don't happen to be in North-Korea you don't get arrested because you "might do" something.
|
On December 16 2014 08:49 LaNague wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2014 08:27 GreenHorizons wrote:
I don't really want to put any blame anywhere but it has to be considered whether people (apparently) taking it on themselves to free themselves instead of waiting until the Police were ready to act, could have contributed to the ending.
Which leads into whether the news reporting that other hostages had escaped had emboldened some of the hostages to attempt their own escape instead of just waiting for him to nod off and let the police do their job.
Im sure you would sit there when some muslim nutjob has taken you hostage and could start with the traditional IS public beheading at any point, or just shoot you, or explode for his 70 virgins.
This guy was hardly a 'devout Muslim'. Switching to Sunni a month before he went homicidal is more of a sign of a cry for attention than anything to do with religion.
That being said I probably would of been one of the first groups to make a dash, if I hadn't left as soon as he came in (people think I'm paranoid because I always plan an escape route and try to sit in strategic locations).
But after the adrenaline was gone I would probably feel bad for abandoning the other hostages, particularly if I had already spent many hours with them (like the later groups). Of course I don't know what was going on in there so for all I know they gave them a chance to make a run with them and they for one reason or another chose not to go along. I'm also thinking about it with American police instead of Australian. Considering our cops miss more than they hit what they are aiming for and instead of just having the brown skinned hostage get on the ground while they pat him down our police would likely have been more aggressive I would probably take my chances making my own escape if I thought there wasn't going to be a peaceful resolution.
|
Obviously the only person at fault is the perpetrator, but there is no indication anyone was ever in danger. Trying to be a hero is rarely the correct course of action.
17 hrs passed and he hadn't harmed anyone. I mean he even had them fed.
Police were right in trying to wait it out. The hostages should have done the same.
|
Let me add some concluding thoughts in addition to my remarks yesterday on this horrific act of terror.
The death of two hostages is tragic, and for me at least, unexpected. It's still not clearly known what instigated the shoot out and police storming the building, although it's been reported that hostages tried to wrestle the gun out of Monis' control. The Guardian has a comprehensive summary of what is known.
The news coverage of this incident was also steeped in political correctness, with reporters from several news agencies, including the ABC (Australian, not American) and BBC continually referring to the Islamic flag used as "a black flag with Arabic writing". It's OK to say that this was a religiously motivated act, because that's exactly what it was, as Monis made a point of showing this off by using the flag and claiming support for ISIS. This political correctness was also aided by the police attempting to shut down this discussion, with mixed success, by quashing reports of Monis' demands.
It isn't bigotry or Islamophobia to say that this was a terrorist act motivated by Monis' Islamic faith, as most terrorist acts are, and it's not the same as saying all Muslims are partly responsible. The massive illridewithyou hastag was a somewhat positive outcome as targeting Muslims over this incident is wrong and misguided, particularly since most Muslims in Western countries don't condone this. But it was also hypocritical that some people were seemingly more concerned with the hypothetical and non-existent anti-Muslim backlash than the safety of the hostages. If only the Muslim world would show as much tolerance for gays, cartoonists, blasphemers, atheists, women, and Quran burners as #illridewithyou has shown to them.
Much attention has been given to Monis' history of law-breaking, however, it is more concerning that Monis was previously convicted for writing offensive and insulting letters to the families of deceased Australian soldiers. While I haven't read the letters (if you find them, I'd like to see), news reports have not described them as containing true threats, merely that they are offensive and threatening. In the US, the First Amendment protects even the Westboro Baptist Church from picketing the funeral of dead soldiers with messages of hate, and rightly so. Together with the Abbott government's failure earlier this year to repeal Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act (for US readers, what happened is exactly equivalent to if the journalists or political operatives who claimed that Elizabeth Warren abused her Native American heritage for advantage were found guilty of an offense), this is even more proof of Australia's outrageous apathy and intolerance towards free speech. It's a disgrace and would have never happened in the US.
We seem to live in a post-terrorism world in the sense that the reactions to religiously-inspired terrorist events are now formulaic and predictable. There's a large group of blind progressives rallying for tolerance, accusing people of Islamophobia, and claiming there's no connection to religion. There's a smaller group of extreme right-wingers who respond by attacking Muslims and Islam. There's an even smaller group of atheists and liberals who are realists about the important and self-proclaimed role of religious faith in motivating these acts of terror and whose nuance is not so easily captured in a short soundbite or hashtag.
|
On December 16 2014 18:28 paralleluniverse wrote:Let me add some concluding thoughts in addition to my remarks yesterday on this horrific act of terror. The death of two hostages is tragic, and for me at least, unexpected. It's still not clearly known what instigated the shoot out and police storming the building. The news coverage of this incident was also steeped in political correctness, with reporters from several news agencies, including the ABC (Australian, not American) and BBC continually referring to the Islamic flag used as "a black flag with Arabic writing". It's OK to say that this was a religiously motivated act, because that's exactly what it was, as Man Haron Monis made a point of showing this off by using the flag and claiming support for ISIS. This political correctness was also aided by the police attempting to shut down this discussion, with mixed success, by quashing reports of Monis' demands. It isn't bigotry or Islamophobia to say that this was a terrorist act motivated by Monis' Islamic faith, as most terrorist acts are, and it's not the same as saying all Muslims are partly responsible. The massive illridewithyou hastag was a somewhat positive outcome as targeting Muslims over this incident is wrong and misguided, particularly since most Muslims in Western countries don't condone this. But it was also hypocritical that some people were seemingly more concerned with the hypothetical and non-existent anti-Muslim backlash than the safety of the hostages. If only the Muslim world would show as much tolerance for gays, cartoonists, blasphemers, atheists, women, and Quran burners as #illridewithyou has shown to them. Lastly, while much attention has been given to Monis' history of law-breaking, it is more concerning that Monis was previously convicted for writing offensive and insulting letters to the families of deceased Australian soldiers. While I haven't read the letter (if one finds them, I'd like to see), news reports have not described them as containing true threats, merely that they are offensive and threatening. In the US, the First Amendment protects the Westboro Baptist Church from picketing the funeral of dead soldiers with messages of hate, and rightly so. Together with the Abbott government's failure to repeal Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act (for US readers, what happened is exactly equivalent to if the journalists who claimed Elizabeth Warren abused her Native American heritage for advantage were found guilty of an offense) earlier this year, this is even more proof of Australia's outrageous apathy and intolerance towards free speech. It's a disgrace. We seem to live in a post-terrorism world, in the sense that the reactions to terrorist events are now formulaic and predictable, with blind progressives rallying against tolerance, accusing people of Islamophobia and claiming no connection to religion, while a small group of extreme right-wingers attacking Muslims and Islam, and a small group of atheists and liberals who are realists about the important and self-proclaimed role of religious faith in motivating these acts of terror and whose nuance is not so easy captured in a short soundbite.
As much as you might want this to be about his "faith" it just doesn't really fit his history. Devoutly religious people aren't usually habitual offenders who switch (got kicked out really) denominations (were talking basically switching sides in a war) a month before they commit their final act of devotion to their brand new religion.
He used ISIS to get attention he wasn't getting doing all the other crazy stunts he was doing. ISIS is happy to take credit for any violent act against the west (yet THEY haven't even tried to claim any credit for the acts of this lone gunman). Calling this moron a terrorist inspired by ISIS is helping their cause far more than it is hurting it. Your concerns about the "PC" nature of the coverage are disturbing. You are basically suggesting you wanted the media to do exactly what this jackass and ISIS wanted them to do?
This (based off of what we know so far) resembles a mentally unwell person who happen to pretend to be Muslim far more than some devout Muslim who was either turned or radicalized by ISIS. If you are going to take his word on his 'faith' don't stop there, go ahead and swallow all the other BS he is spewing.
|
On December 16 2014 18:56 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2014 18:28 paralleluniverse wrote:Let me add some concluding thoughts in addition to my remarks yesterday on this horrific act of terror. The death of two hostages is tragic, and for me at least, unexpected. It's still not clearly known what instigated the shoot out and police storming the building. The news coverage of this incident was also steeped in political correctness, with reporters from several news agencies, including the ABC (Australian, not American) and BBC continually referring to the Islamic flag used as "a black flag with Arabic writing". It's OK to say that this was a religiously motivated act, because that's exactly what it was, as Man Haron Monis made a point of showing this off by using the flag and claiming support for ISIS. This political correctness was also aided by the police attempting to shut down this discussion, with mixed success, by quashing reports of Monis' demands. It isn't bigotry or Islamophobia to say that this was a terrorist act motivated by Monis' Islamic faith, as most terrorist acts are, and it's not the same as saying all Muslims are partly responsible. The massive illridewithyou hastag was a somewhat positive outcome as targeting Muslims over this incident is wrong and misguided, particularly since most Muslims in Western countries don't condone this. But it was also hypocritical that some people were seemingly more concerned with the hypothetical and non-existent anti-Muslim backlash than the safety of the hostages. If only the Muslim world would show as much tolerance for gays, cartoonists, blasphemers, atheists, women, and Quran burners as #illridewithyou has shown to them. Lastly, while much attention has been given to Monis' history of law-breaking, it is more concerning that Monis was previously convicted for writing offensive and insulting letters to the families of deceased Australian soldiers. While I haven't read the letter (if one finds them, I'd like to see), news reports have not described them as containing true threats, merely that they are offensive and threatening. In the US, the First Amendment protects the Westboro Baptist Church from picketing the funeral of dead soldiers with messages of hate, and rightly so. Together with the Abbott government's failure to repeal Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act (for US readers, what happened is exactly equivalent to if the journalists who claimed Elizabeth Warren abused her Native American heritage for advantage were found guilty of an offense) earlier this year, this is even more proof of Australia's outrageous apathy and intolerance towards free speech. It's a disgrace. We seem to live in a post-terrorism world, in the sense that the reactions to terrorist events are now formulaic and predictable, with blind progressives rallying against tolerance, accusing people of Islamophobia and claiming no connection to religion, while a small group of extreme right-wingers attacking Muslims and Islam, and a small group of atheists and liberals who are realists about the important and self-proclaimed role of religious faith in motivating these acts of terror and whose nuance is not so easy captured in a short soundbite. As much as you might want this to be about his "faith" it just doesn't really fit his history. Devoutly religious people aren't usually habitual offenders who switch (got kicked out really) denominations (were talking basically switching sides in a war) a month before they commit their final act of devotion to their brand new religion. He used ISIS to get attention he wasn't getting doing all the other crazy stunts he was doing. ISIS is happy to take credit for any violent act against the west (yet THEY haven't even tried to claim any credit for the acts of this lone gunman). Calling this moron a terrorist inspired by ISIS is helping their cause far more than it is hurting it. Your concerns about the "PC" nature of the coverage are disturbing. You are basically suggesting you wanted the media to do exactly what this jackass and ISIS wanted them to do? This (based off of what we know so far) resembles a mentally unwell person who happen to pretend to be Muslim far more than some devout Muslim who was either turned or radicalized by ISIS. If you are going to take his word on his 'faith' don't stop there, go ahead and swallow all the other BS he is spewing.
It was a lone wolf attack. So he wasn't a member of ISIS, but he clearly subscribed to their ideology.
|
On December 16 2014 18:28 paralleluniverse wrote:
snip
Snake in the grass.
|
I don't understand the obsession over 'preventing white racist backlash'. The media isn't here to tell us how to think, it's here to tell us what's happening; why can't it do that instead of preaching about tolerance? If Aussies have a hooligan problem, shouldn't it deal with the hooligans, instead of hoping nobody kicks their nests?
|
Northern Ireland22211 Posts
On December 16 2014 19:06 paralleluniverse wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2014 18:56 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 16 2014 18:28 paralleluniverse wrote:Let me add some concluding thoughts in addition to my remarks yesterday on this horrific act of terror. The death of two hostages is tragic, and for me at least, unexpected. It's still not clearly known what instigated the shoot out and police storming the building. The news coverage of this incident was also steeped in political correctness, with reporters from several news agencies, including the ABC (Australian, not American) and BBC continually referring to the Islamic flag used as "a black flag with Arabic writing". It's OK to say that this was a religiously motivated act, because that's exactly what it was, as Man Haron Monis made a point of showing this off by using the flag and claiming support for ISIS. This political correctness was also aided by the police attempting to shut down this discussion, with mixed success, by quashing reports of Monis' demands. It isn't bigotry or Islamophobia to say that this was a terrorist act motivated by Monis' Islamic faith, as most terrorist acts are, and it's not the same as saying all Muslims are partly responsible. The massive illridewithyou hastag was a somewhat positive outcome as targeting Muslims over this incident is wrong and misguided, particularly since most Muslims in Western countries don't condone this. But it was also hypocritical that some people were seemingly more concerned with the hypothetical and non-existent anti-Muslim backlash than the safety of the hostages. If only the Muslim world would show as much tolerance for gays, cartoonists, blasphemers, atheists, women, and Quran burners as #illridewithyou has shown to them. Lastly, while much attention has been given to Monis' history of law-breaking, it is more concerning that Monis was previously convicted for writing offensive and insulting letters to the families of deceased Australian soldiers. While I haven't read the letter (if one finds them, I'd like to see), news reports have not described them as containing true threats, merely that they are offensive and threatening. In the US, the First Amendment protects the Westboro Baptist Church from picketing the funeral of dead soldiers with messages of hate, and rightly so. Together with the Abbott government's failure to repeal Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act (for US readers, what happened is exactly equivalent to if the journalists who claimed Elizabeth Warren abused her Native American heritage for advantage were found guilty of an offense) earlier this year, this is even more proof of Australia's outrageous apathy and intolerance towards free speech. It's a disgrace. We seem to live in a post-terrorism world, in the sense that the reactions to terrorist events are now formulaic and predictable, with blind progressives rallying against tolerance, accusing people of Islamophobia and claiming no connection to religion, while a small group of extreme right-wingers attacking Muslims and Islam, and a small group of atheists and liberals who are realists about the important and self-proclaimed role of religious faith in motivating these acts of terror and whose nuance is not so easy captured in a short soundbite. As much as you might want this to be about his "faith" it just doesn't really fit his history. Devoutly religious people aren't usually habitual offenders who switch (got kicked out really) denominations (were talking basically switching sides in a war) a month before they commit their final act of devotion to their brand new religion. He used ISIS to get attention he wasn't getting doing all the other crazy stunts he was doing. ISIS is happy to take credit for any violent act against the west (yet THEY haven't even tried to claim any credit for the acts of this lone gunman). Calling this moron a terrorist inspired by ISIS is helping their cause far more than it is hurting it. Your concerns about the "PC" nature of the coverage are disturbing. You are basically suggesting you wanted the media to do exactly what this jackass and ISIS wanted them to do? This (based off of what we know so far) resembles a mentally unwell person who happen to pretend to be Muslim far more than some devout Muslim who was either turned or radicalized by ISIS. If you are going to take his word on his 'faith' don't stop there, go ahead and swallow all the other BS he is spewing. It was a lone wolf attack. So he wasn't a member of ISIS, but he clearly subscribed to their ideology.
what evidence is there that he subscribed to Da'ish ideology? honestly, to me, it sounds like he just latched on to the Da'ish flag to bring more attention to himself
|
On December 16 2014 19:06 paralleluniverse wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2014 18:56 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 16 2014 18:28 paralleluniverse wrote:Let me add some concluding thoughts in addition to my remarks yesterday on this horrific act of terror. The death of two hostages is tragic, and for me at least, unexpected. It's still not clearly known what instigated the shoot out and police storming the building. The news coverage of this incident was also steeped in political correctness, with reporters from several news agencies, including the ABC (Australian, not American) and BBC continually referring to the Islamic flag used as "a black flag with Arabic writing". It's OK to say that this was a religiously motivated act, because that's exactly what it was, as Man Haron Monis made a point of showing this off by using the flag and claiming support for ISIS. This political correctness was also aided by the police attempting to shut down this discussion, with mixed success, by quashing reports of Monis' demands. It isn't bigotry or Islamophobia to say that this was a terrorist act motivated by Monis' Islamic faith, as most terrorist acts are, and it's not the same as saying all Muslims are partly responsible. The massive illridewithyou hastag was a somewhat positive outcome as targeting Muslims over this incident is wrong and misguided, particularly since most Muslims in Western countries don't condone this. But it was also hypocritical that some people were seemingly more concerned with the hypothetical and non-existent anti-Muslim backlash than the safety of the hostages. If only the Muslim world would show as much tolerance for gays, cartoonists, blasphemers, atheists, women, and Quran burners as #illridewithyou has shown to them. Lastly, while much attention has been given to Monis' history of law-breaking, it is more concerning that Monis was previously convicted for writing offensive and insulting letters to the families of deceased Australian soldiers. While I haven't read the letter (if one finds them, I'd like to see), news reports have not described them as containing true threats, merely that they are offensive and threatening. In the US, the First Amendment protects the Westboro Baptist Church from picketing the funeral of dead soldiers with messages of hate, and rightly so. Together with the Abbott government's failure to repeal Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act (for US readers, what happened is exactly equivalent to if the journalists who claimed Elizabeth Warren abused her Native American heritage for advantage were found guilty of an offense) earlier this year, this is even more proof of Australia's outrageous apathy and intolerance towards free speech. It's a disgrace. We seem to live in a post-terrorism world, in the sense that the reactions to terrorist events are now formulaic and predictable, with blind progressives rallying against tolerance, accusing people of Islamophobia and claiming no connection to religion, while a small group of extreme right-wingers attacking Muslims and Islam, and a small group of atheists and liberals who are realists about the important and self-proclaimed role of religious faith in motivating these acts of terror and whose nuance is not so easy captured in a short soundbite. As much as you might want this to be about his "faith" it just doesn't really fit his history. Devoutly religious people aren't usually habitual offenders who switch (got kicked out really) denominations (were talking basically switching sides in a war) a month before they commit their final act of devotion to their brand new religion. He used ISIS to get attention he wasn't getting doing all the other crazy stunts he was doing. ISIS is happy to take credit for any violent act against the west (yet THEY haven't even tried to claim any credit for the acts of this lone gunman). Calling this moron a terrorist inspired by ISIS is helping their cause far more than it is hurting it. Your concerns about the "PC" nature of the coverage are disturbing. You are basically suggesting you wanted the media to do exactly what this jackass and ISIS wanted them to do? This (based off of what we know so far) resembles a mentally unwell person who happen to pretend to be Muslim far more than some devout Muslim who was either turned or radicalized by ISIS. If you are going to take his word on his 'faith' don't stop there, go ahead and swallow all the other BS he is spewing. It was a lone wolf attack. So he wasn't a member of ISIS, but he clearly subscribed to their ideology.
For like a month... Before that he was practicing "black magic" and other crap. If you really think he was such a subscriber to their ideology you probably believe that he was a "cleric" too... The guy was rejected by the Australian Muslim communities, Sunni and Shia. Basically everyone who interacted with him before this said that he was strange or seemed mentally unwell. We going to blame GTA when some maniac says it inspired him to go on a rampage... Or will we just blame it on a mentally unwell person who was looking for an excuse/more attention...?
There have been attacks around the world with real/significant connections to terrorist organizations, this was not one of them (based off of what is currently known).
|
I don't understand the point of that hashtag. Someone who is unstable enough to attack a middle-eastern looking person because of this siege would be just as ready to attack a muslim for no reason. But I guess common sense was never the stronger side of the PC crowd.
Meanwhile the Taliban stormed a school in Pakistan and killed 84 children. This world...
|
On December 16 2014 19:55 zeo wrote:
I don't understand the point of that hashtag. Someone who is unstable enough to attack a middle-eastern looking person because of this siege would be just as ready to attack a muslim for no reason. But I guess common sense was never the stronger side of the PC crowd.
Meanwhile the Taliban stormed a school in Pakistan and killed 84 children. This world...
Well a Muslim woman (the hijab usually gives them away) who has to walk home from a bus stop alone would probably appreciate if there was at least someone there who would call the police if she was attacked. Not to mention people who would retaliate against random Muslims are cowards and the more people they think might not just turn a blind eye the less likely they are to try something.
Also if you see some of the rhetoric flying around it comes as quite a comfort to know that you have lots of allies in your community.
But yeah if you want to just call it 'PC peoples lack of common sense" I don't think you'll be surprising anyone.
|
He sounds like a nutjob yeah. But he got the idea (i assume) from news coverages about ISIS, Boko Haram and such. Some other idealogy might also sent him off? Probably. Still he subscribed to radical Islam like many others do (although for different reasons).
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
