|
Once again, as this is a sensitive topic and one that can cause a lot of unnecessary things to be said in the heat of the moment, be VERY careful about what you post. Think twice before actually stating something and please be considerate of anyone who may feel involved or affected. |
On July 16 2016 03:01 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2016 02:57 mahrgell wrote:On July 16 2016 02:49 SK.Testie wrote:News that is more relevant to the topic at hand though. Well, I think Islam is relevant and I'll always be the first one to get banned for it but I'll hold that conversation on my end for now. + Show Spoiler + How "intensify bordercontrols" turns into "re-imposing bordercontrols"... High quality media. Well the twitter account is just a “news site” which seems to mostly copy-paste stories from other parts so of the internet and take credit for them.
Yes, and if you check basically any news site, they talk about "intensify" "tighten" or "increase".
So don't tell me that choice of word is not an intentional thing 
|
So let's start discussing how we can defeat these ideologies?
My pitch: deny ISIS affiliation when ISIS claims the attack. Try to link them with everything they are against. Try to disrupt their ideology from within with their oh so frail infrastructure that's based on however radicalisation works.
|
On July 16 2016 03:07 SK.Testie wrote:![[image loading]](http://puu.sh/q2Lup/0e04307f6f.jpg)
In Turkey alone there are twice as many refugees as all of Europe. The countries for which you wrote BENEFITS have under 10%.
|
On July 16 2016 02:33 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2016 02:27 Sent. wrote:
You can't defeat radical islam but you can suppress it just like you can suppress fascism and communism. It is about as obtainable a goal as waging a war on drugs or crime.
How many countries did the nazis occupy after World War II?
|
On July 16 2016 03:12 Biff The Understudy wrote:
What I learnt from this thread :
1- People don't give a damn about the fact that the guy was basically not religious. It's about islam and it's all because islam is inherently evil (oh that's clever...)
2- People are absolutely certain that it's a terrorist attack just like the Bataclan. It could, for what we know, be a mass murder from a mentally unstable guy vaguely inspired by ISIS. Just like there are mass shootings in the united state. Fact is it could be, and we don't know.
3- Our right wing team seems to completely disregard the fact that ISIS claims that its goal with those attacks is to mount muslims and non muslims against each other because that's how they recruit. They said it. But our beloved TL far right boys have no problem playing ISIS game and being the useful idiots of islamist terrorists.
You don't need to look at this thread to learn that, you just need to look around.
The way we are bombarded with 24 hour news of terrorist attacks, as if to deliberately spread fear and panic, doesn't help. You can't lookf a facebook, twitter or anything on the internet without being reminded that we are in danger now.
Its only human nature to look for answers, to try and find out where the blame lies and respond with fury.
The fact is that people are generally so uneducated that they completely fail to see any kind of grey area when it comes to the nature of these attacks vs the nature of Islam in general.
Of course these attacks have something to do with Islam. To deny this is not only insane, it completely destroys any credibility people might think they have on the subject because it is such a demonstrably false assumption. When the perpetrators so often claim to support Islamist groups, why would you ignore that? My theory is that it is an equally stupid defensive reaction to people who believe that all muslims are terrorists. Anyone who can think clearly about anything knows that the truth is somewhere in between. ISIS is not representative of most muslims in the west, but it is an Islamic movement.
However, to believe that that means we have to have some kind of military war against Islam is equally insane and preposterous. To believe that 'most muslims' are involved in terror, or would do anything but condemn terror is equally stupid. It comes from that fear that is so efficiently instilled in us not by ISIS but by the BBC etc. doing their work for them. ISIS themselves don't need to do anything at all any more. They just wait for some moron to blow himself up or shoot a bunch of people and then watch as Western society eats itself in a fit of hysteria. I'm beginning to wonder if this is even an ideological struggle anymore, rather than just some kind of mass insanity.
Of course terror attacks are horrible. They cause devestation to the lives of those affected. Looking at the problem logically though, there have been how many terror attacks in the West in the last 10 years? How many total deaths? People are willing to discuss ethnic cleansing, bringing in a police state, all these desperate measures for a problem that barely touches the statistics when it comes to people dying young. That is the definition of a successful campaign of terror.
|
What the majority of the right wing wants is to just be left in peace in their own countries. That's it. They do not want "economic migrants". They were willing to accept temporary refugees. This is what the right wants.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-36786438
|
On July 16 2016 03:32 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2016 03:12 Biff The Understudy wrote:
What I learnt from this thread :
1- People don't give a damn about the fact that the guy was basically not religious. It's about islam and it's all because islam is inherently evil (oh that's clever...)
2- People are absolutely certain that it's a terrorist attack just like the Bataclan. It could, for what we know, be a mass murder from a mentally unstable guy vaguely inspired by ISIS. Just like there are mass shootings in the united state. Fact is it could be, and we don't know.
3- Our right wing team seems to completely disregard the fact that ISIS claims that its goal with those attacks is to mount muslims and non muslims against each other because that's how they recruit. They said it. But our beloved TL far right boys have no problem playing ISIS game and being the useful idiots of islamist terrorists.
Of course these attacks have something to do with Islam. To deny this is not only insane, it completely destroys any credibility people might think they have on the subject because it is such a demonstrably false assumption. When the perpetrators so often claim to support Islamist groups, why would you ignore that? My theory is that it is an equally stupid defensive reaction to people who believe that all muslims are terrorists. Anyone who can think clearly about anything knows that the truth is somewhere in between. ISIS is not representative of most muslims in the west, but it is an Islamic movement.
I think the biggest criticism from the right is the mere fact that the left insists on denying that it doesn't have anything to do with Islam which, as you note, is insane.
I agree it's stupid to assume all muslims are terrorists, but I don't really see any establishment, media, or right politicians making this point so I'm not really worried about it becoming a norm.
The left insisting that Islam is a religion of peace and refusing to acknowledge that they are related has become an accepted norm though, in the name of multiculturalism and political correctness, and serves to both ignore the problem while agitating everyone who knows that it does have something to do with Islam.
|
Well the problem is that the european left is in complete disarray, both ideologically and institutionnally. In muslim countries, "the left" is not dumb enough to argue that islam a "religion of peace" or whatever, and the're pretty clear on the danger of islam, like any religion.
But since most muslim population are also, in part, the poorest in most european countries, it is hard to find a balance between the legitimate critic of any religion, and the necessity to defend the muslim population because of their weakness.
|
On July 16 2016 03:57 WhiteDog wrote:
Well the problem is that the european left is in complete disarray, both ideologically and institutionnally. In muslim countries, "the left" is not dumb enough to argue that islam a "religion of peace" or whatever, and the're pretty clear on the danger of islam, like any religion.
But since most muslim population are also, in part, the poorest in most european countries, it is hard to find a balance between the legitimate critic of any religion, and the necessity to defend the muslim population because of their weakness.
To be fair, most people trying to preach about tolerance are trying to avoid issues like the Muslim doctor who was murder outside a Mosque in Texas. Or the recent attack on a sheikh, because people are really smart and see a brown man with turban and assume Muslim terrorist.
Its less about them and more that all western countries have a large enough to be dangerous population of bigoted clowns just looking for an excuse to be violent.
|
On July 16 2016 03:53 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2016 03:32 Jockmcplop wrote:On July 16 2016 03:12 Biff The Understudy wrote:
What I learnt from this thread :
1- People don't give a damn about the fact that the guy was basically not religious. It's about islam and it's all because islam is inherently evil (oh that's clever...)
2- People are absolutely certain that it's a terrorist attack just like the Bataclan. It could, for what we know, be a mass murder from a mentally unstable guy vaguely inspired by ISIS. Just like there are mass shootings in the united state. Fact is it could be, and we don't know.
3- Our right wing team seems to completely disregard the fact that ISIS claims that its goal with those attacks is to mount muslims and non muslims against each other because that's how they recruit. They said it. But our beloved TL far right boys have no problem playing ISIS game and being the useful idiots of islamist terrorists.
Of course these attacks have something to do with Islam. To deny this is not only insane, it completely destroys any credibility people might think they have on the subject because it is such a demonstrably false assumption. When the perpetrators so often claim to support Islamist groups, why would you ignore that? My theory is that it is an equally stupid defensive reaction to people who believe that all muslims are terrorists. Anyone who can think clearly about anything knows that the truth is somewhere in between. ISIS is not representative of most muslims in the west, but it is an Islamic movement. I think the biggest criticism from the right is the mere fact that the left insists on denying that it doesn't have anything to do with Islam which, as you note, is insane. I agree it's stupid to assume all muslims are terrorists, but I don't really see any establishment, media, or right politicians making this point so I'm not really worried about it becoming a norm. The left insisting that Islam is a religion of peace and refusing to acknowledge that they are related has become an accepted norm though, in the name of multiculturalism and political correctness, and serves to both ignore the problem while agitating everyone who knows that it does have something to do with Islam.
what left says that? In all the forums I'm on, which are left-leaning forums, I haven't seen anyone actually pushing/claiming the Islam is a religion of peace thing. The only people who seem to bring that up are far-right people claiming that there exists some leftists saying that. It doesn't seem to represent a significant part of the overall left from what I've seen.
|
Well... the quote is just a few days old, given in a different context and still applying too well:
Argument turns too easily into animosity. Disagreement escalates into dehumanization. Too often, we judge other groups by their worst examples while judging ourselves by our best intentions. And this has strained our bonds of understanding and common purpose.
I think this thread is showing really well, what he meant. And no, the auther is certainly not part of "the left" and someone I would have never thought to agree with.
+ Show Spoiler +
|
On July 16 2016 03:52 SK.Testie wrote:What the majority of the right wing wants is to just be left in peace in their own countries. That's it. They do not want "economic migrants". They were willing to accept temporary refugees. This is what the right wants. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-36786438
So they want a complete economic disaster?
Because the economic benefits of migrants are pretty thoroughly documented.
|
On July 16 2016 04:06 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2016 03:53 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On July 16 2016 03:32 Jockmcplop wrote:On July 16 2016 03:12 Biff The Understudy wrote:
What I learnt from this thread :
1- People don't give a damn about the fact that the guy was basically not religious. It's about islam and it's all because islam is inherently evil (oh that's clever...)
2- People are absolutely certain that it's a terrorist attack just like the Bataclan. It could, for what we know, be a mass murder from a mentally unstable guy vaguely inspired by ISIS. Just like there are mass shootings in the united state. Fact is it could be, and we don't know.
3- Our right wing team seems to completely disregard the fact that ISIS claims that its goal with those attacks is to mount muslims and non muslims against each other because that's how they recruit. They said it. But our beloved TL far right boys have no problem playing ISIS game and being the useful idiots of islamist terrorists.
Of course these attacks have something to do with Islam. To deny this is not only insane, it completely destroys any credibility people might think they have on the subject because it is such a demonstrably false assumption. When the perpetrators so often claim to support Islamist groups, why would you ignore that? My theory is that it is an equally stupid defensive reaction to people who believe that all muslims are terrorists. Anyone who can think clearly about anything knows that the truth is somewhere in between. ISIS is not representative of most muslims in the west, but it is an Islamic movement. I think the biggest criticism from the right is the mere fact that the left insists on denying that it doesn't have anything to do with Islam which, as you note, is insane. I agree it's stupid to assume all muslims are terrorists, but I don't really see any establishment, media, or right politicians making this point so I'm not really worried about it becoming a norm. The left insisting that Islam is a religion of peace and refusing to acknowledge that they are related has become an accepted norm though, in the name of multiculturalism and political correctness, and serves to both ignore the problem while agitating everyone who knows that it does have something to do with Islam. what left says that? In all the forums I'm on, which are left-leaning forums, I haven't seen anyone actually pushing/claiming the Islam is a religion of peace thing. The only people who seem to bring that up are far-right people claiming that there exists some leftists saying that. It doesn't seem to represent a significant part of the overall left from what I've seen.
Well the current up-and-coming new leader the left has elected to represent them for one
'Nothing to do with Islam' right there for you
If she doesn't represent the vast majority of the left as you insist maybe you should elect someone better to represent you than her
'Tolerant' when so many pewpolls show disproportionately large numbers of muslims being some of the most backwards people in the world on things like gay rights, women's rights, etc, even when they're polled in western countries
It's a problem that people like her are ignoring and marginalizing, and then whenever the right wants to talk about it, they become 'closed-minded racists/bigots who are trying to say all muslims are evil'.
It's not engaging with the opposition it's just mudslinging and ignoring the problem
|
On July 16 2016 04:15 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2016 04:06 zlefin wrote:On July 16 2016 03:53 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On July 16 2016 03:32 Jockmcplop wrote:On July 16 2016 03:12 Biff The Understudy wrote:
What I learnt from this thread :
1- People don't give a damn about the fact that the guy was basically not religious. It's about islam and it's all because islam is inherently evil (oh that's clever...)
2- People are absolutely certain that it's a terrorist attack just like the Bataclan. It could, for what we know, be a mass murder from a mentally unstable guy vaguely inspired by ISIS. Just like there are mass shootings in the united state. Fact is it could be, and we don't know.
3- Our right wing team seems to completely disregard the fact that ISIS claims that its goal with those attacks is to mount muslims and non muslims against each other because that's how they recruit. They said it. But our beloved TL far right boys have no problem playing ISIS game and being the useful idiots of islamist terrorists.
Of course these attacks have something to do with Islam. To deny this is not only insane, it completely destroys any credibility people might think they have on the subject because it is such a demonstrably false assumption. When the perpetrators so often claim to support Islamist groups, why would you ignore that? My theory is that it is an equally stupid defensive reaction to people who believe that all muslims are terrorists. Anyone who can think clearly about anything knows that the truth is somewhere in between. ISIS is not representative of most muslims in the west, but it is an Islamic movement. I think the biggest criticism from the right is the mere fact that the left insists on denying that it doesn't have anything to do with Islam which, as you note, is insane. I agree it's stupid to assume all muslims are terrorists, but I don't really see any establishment, media, or right politicians making this point so I'm not really worried about it becoming a norm. The left insisting that Islam is a religion of peace and refusing to acknowledge that they are related has become an accepted norm though, in the name of multiculturalism and political correctness, and serves to both ignore the problem while agitating everyone who knows that it does have something to do with Islam. what left says that? In all the forums I'm on, which are left-leaning forums, I haven't seen anyone actually pushing/claiming the Islam is a religion of peace thing. The only people who seem to bring that up are far-right people claiming that there exists some leftists saying that. It doesn't seem to represent a significant part of the overall left from what I've seen. Well the current up-and-coming new leader the left has elected to represent them for one https://twitter.com/hillaryclinton/status/667371059885301761'Nothing to do with Islam' right there for you If she doesn't represent the vast majority of the left as you insist maybe you should elect someone better to represent you than her 'Tolerant' when so many pewpolls show disproportionately large numbers of muslims being some of the most backwards people in the world on things like gay rights, women's rights, etc, even when they're polled in western countries
They could be members of the US Republican party, but they aren’t Christian. That is the cut off.
|
On July 16 2016 04:19 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2016 04:15 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On July 16 2016 04:06 zlefin wrote:On July 16 2016 03:53 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On July 16 2016 03:32 Jockmcplop wrote:On July 16 2016 03:12 Biff The Understudy wrote:
What I learnt from this thread :
1- People don't give a damn about the fact that the guy was basically not religious. It's about islam and it's all because islam is inherently evil (oh that's clever...)
2- People are absolutely certain that it's a terrorist attack just like the Bataclan. It could, for what we know, be a mass murder from a mentally unstable guy vaguely inspired by ISIS. Just like there are mass shootings in the united state. Fact is it could be, and we don't know.
3- Our right wing team seems to completely disregard the fact that ISIS claims that its goal with those attacks is to mount muslims and non muslims against each other because that's how they recruit. They said it. But our beloved TL far right boys have no problem playing ISIS game and being the useful idiots of islamist terrorists.
Of course these attacks have something to do with Islam. To deny this is not only insane, it completely destroys any credibility people might think they have on the subject because it is such a demonstrably false assumption. When the perpetrators so often claim to support Islamist groups, why would you ignore that? My theory is that it is an equally stupid defensive reaction to people who believe that all muslims are terrorists. Anyone who can think clearly about anything knows that the truth is somewhere in between. ISIS is not representative of most muslims in the west, but it is an Islamic movement. I think the biggest criticism from the right is the mere fact that the left insists on denying that it doesn't have anything to do with Islam which, as you note, is insane. I agree it's stupid to assume all muslims are terrorists, but I don't really see any establishment, media, or right politicians making this point so I'm not really worried about it becoming a norm. The left insisting that Islam is a religion of peace and refusing to acknowledge that they are related has become an accepted norm though, in the name of multiculturalism and political correctness, and serves to both ignore the problem while agitating everyone who knows that it does have something to do with Islam. what left says that? In all the forums I'm on, which are left-leaning forums, I haven't seen anyone actually pushing/claiming the Islam is a religion of peace thing. The only people who seem to bring that up are far-right people claiming that there exists some leftists saying that. It doesn't seem to represent a significant part of the overall left from what I've seen. Well the current up-and-coming new leader the left has elected to represent them for one https://twitter.com/hillaryclinton/status/667371059885301761'Nothing to do with Islam' right there for you If she doesn't represent the vast majority of the left as you insist maybe you should elect someone better to represent you than her 'Tolerant' when so many pewpolls show disproportionately large numbers of muslims being some of the most backwards people in the world on things like gay rights, women's rights, etc, even when they're polled in western countries They could be members of the US Republican party, but they aren’t Christian. That is the cut off.
And then they go about spouting nonsense like this to try to justify their insane position which further exasperates the issue.
|
|
|
On July 16 2016 04:15 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2016 04:06 zlefin wrote:On July 16 2016 03:53 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On July 16 2016 03:32 Jockmcplop wrote:On July 16 2016 03:12 Biff The Understudy wrote:
What I learnt from this thread :
1- People don't give a damn about the fact that the guy was basically not religious. It's about islam and it's all because islam is inherently evil (oh that's clever...)
2- People are absolutely certain that it's a terrorist attack just like the Bataclan. It could, for what we know, be a mass murder from a mentally unstable guy vaguely inspired by ISIS. Just like there are mass shootings in the united state. Fact is it could be, and we don't know.
3- Our right wing team seems to completely disregard the fact that ISIS claims that its goal with those attacks is to mount muslims and non muslims against each other because that's how they recruit. They said it. But our beloved TL far right boys have no problem playing ISIS game and being the useful idiots of islamist terrorists.
Of course these attacks have something to do with Islam. To deny this is not only insane, it completely destroys any credibility people might think they have on the subject because it is such a demonstrably false assumption. When the perpetrators so often claim to support Islamist groups, why would you ignore that? My theory is that it is an equally stupid defensive reaction to people who believe that all muslims are terrorists. Anyone who can think clearly about anything knows that the truth is somewhere in between. ISIS is not representative of most muslims in the west, but it is an Islamic movement. I think the biggest criticism from the right is the mere fact that the left insists on denying that it doesn't have anything to do with Islam which, as you note, is insane. I agree it's stupid to assume all muslims are terrorists, but I don't really see any establishment, media, or right politicians making this point so I'm not really worried about it becoming a norm. The left insisting that Islam is a religion of peace and refusing to acknowledge that they are related has become an accepted norm though, in the name of multiculturalism and political correctness, and serves to both ignore the problem while agitating everyone who knows that it does have something to do with Islam. what left says that? In all the forums I'm on, which are left-leaning forums, I haven't seen anyone actually pushing/claiming the Islam is a religion of peace thing. The only people who seem to bring that up are far-right people claiming that there exists some leftists saying that. It doesn't seem to represent a significant part of the overall left from what I've seen. Well the current up-and-coming new leader the left has elected to represent them for one https://twitter.com/hillaryclinton/status/667371059885301761'Nothing to do with Islam' right there for you If she doesn't represent the vast majority of the left as you insist maybe you should elect someone better to represent you than her 'Tolerant' when so many pewpolls show disproportionately large numbers of muslims being some of the most backwards people in the world on things like gay rights, women's rights, etc, even when they're polled in western countries It's a problem that people like her are ignoring and marginalizing, and then whenever the right wants to talk about it, they become 'closed-minded racists/bigots who are trying to say all muslims are evil'. It's not engaging with the opposition it's just mudslinging and ignoring the problem
yeah, she is incorrect there. Though she'd be right if the statement was toned down a bit.
|
On July 16 2016 04:21 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2016 04:19 Plansix wrote:On July 16 2016 04:15 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On July 16 2016 04:06 zlefin wrote:On July 16 2016 03:53 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On July 16 2016 03:32 Jockmcplop wrote:On July 16 2016 03:12 Biff The Understudy wrote:
What I learnt from this thread :
1- People don't give a damn about the fact that the guy was basically not religious. It's about islam and it's all because islam is inherently evil (oh that's clever...)
2- People are absolutely certain that it's a terrorist attack just like the Bataclan. It could, for what we know, be a mass murder from a mentally unstable guy vaguely inspired by ISIS. Just like there are mass shootings in the united state. Fact is it could be, and we don't know.
3- Our right wing team seems to completely disregard the fact that ISIS claims that its goal with those attacks is to mount muslims and non muslims against each other because that's how they recruit. They said it. But our beloved TL far right boys have no problem playing ISIS game and being the useful idiots of islamist terrorists.
Of course these attacks have something to do with Islam. To deny this is not only insane, it completely destroys any credibility people might think they have on the subject because it is such a demonstrably false assumption. When the perpetrators so often claim to support Islamist groups, why would you ignore that? My theory is that it is an equally stupid defensive reaction to people who believe that all muslims are terrorists. Anyone who can think clearly about anything knows that the truth is somewhere in between. ISIS is not representative of most muslims in the west, but it is an Islamic movement. I think the biggest criticism from the right is the mere fact that the left insists on denying that it doesn't have anything to do with Islam which, as you note, is insane. I agree it's stupid to assume all muslims are terrorists, but I don't really see any establishment, media, or right politicians making this point so I'm not really worried about it becoming a norm. The left insisting that Islam is a religion of peace and refusing to acknowledge that they are related has become an accepted norm though, in the name of multiculturalism and political correctness, and serves to both ignore the problem while agitating everyone who knows that it does have something to do with Islam. what left says that? In all the forums I'm on, which are left-leaning forums, I haven't seen anyone actually pushing/claiming the Islam is a religion of peace thing. The only people who seem to bring that up are far-right people claiming that there exists some leftists saying that. It doesn't seem to represent a significant part of the overall left from what I've seen. Well the current up-and-coming new leader the left has elected to represent them for one https://twitter.com/hillaryclinton/status/667371059885301761'Nothing to do with Islam' right there for you If she doesn't represent the vast majority of the left as you insist maybe you should elect someone better to represent you than her 'Tolerant' when so many pewpolls show disproportionately large numbers of muslims being some of the most backwards people in the world on things like gay rights, women's rights, etc, even when they're polled in western countries They could be members of the US Republican party, but they aren’t Christian. That is the cut off. And then they go about spouting nonsense like this to try to justify their insane position which further exasperates the issue.
It’s the only way to discuss massive generalizations about huge sections of the world. Many parts of the Middle East massively behind on social issues. So is a large section of the GOP, who you have freely admitted you plan to vote for.
There have been numerous calls in this thread to avoid mass generalizations and discuss specific nations, demographics and groups. But we keep getting pulled back to massive generalizations that are so broad and sweeping that nothing can really be discussed.
|
On July 15 2016 23:21 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On July 15 2016 18:41 stilt wrote:On July 15 2016 18:14 Biff The Understudy wrote:On July 15 2016 17:43 tomatriedes wrote:On July 15 2016 17:28 Nyan wrote:
Every rational thinking person will know that nothing can be done to prevent a killing like this.
I wonder with what retarded measures they are going to come up with. There are things that can be done to prevent the proliferation of the ideology that causes such attacks- completely cut off all funding from gulf countries towards mosques in Europe that encourage extremism, but for economic reasons it won't be done. Inversely, you could promote and fund tolerant, peaceful and open minded islam. That won't be done for political reason and because of our concept of laicité in which state and religion never mingle. The Paris mosque is a remarkable example of what a successful muslim religious institution can be like. But it's a bit unique, and no one shows any interest in financing similar places. That being said it is proven and documented that the french jihadi are not radicalized in mosques but rather on the internet and that there are very little bridges between salafists and ISIS style terrorists. Not saying that salafism is not a problem, it certainly is, but it is a different one. It is important to understand that terrorists of the last years in France are religiously completely illiterate : Salah Abdelsam admitted to his lawyer that he had never hold a Qoran in his hands and never read a line of it, only had read about it on the net. They are generally in rupture with their muslim community, and were often not or very little religious before being recruited by ISIS. And the liberals strike again by asking for impossible stuffs and exonerating their friends the salafists by focusing only on Lioger analyze. Don't know why but when I saw guys like you, the lesson givers, I have always the feeling that what happened is always a victory for you. Look, if you absolutely want to do ISIS job and say it's an islam vs west struggle, go ahead. As with Merah, it has already emerged the dude was not religious or very little before becoming radicalized. As for salafists, the French secret service say themselves that there are very little or none connections between terrorists and salasfists in recent attacks. It's not my opinions, but facts.
Merah, you're talking about the guy with a salafist brother? Yeah sure, what a proof that salafist has nothing to do with this! their hate speeches have nothing to do with this, the fact that most of them did not want to condemn Daesh and lived a radical Islam in opposition to the republic and society values has nothing to do with it. All the terrorists were just some psychopaths who lived in poor socio economical conditions right? You really should get down your ivory tower.
The struggle is about Islam vs West, it is about a dynamic form of Islam derived into totalitarism against sth that is not but which could become like this with the far right wing and the lack of energy in our society.
I lived in France for twenty years
Leave it for Canada. You will become a "citizen of the world", is it not the secret dream of all liberals?
I have an uncle and three cousin who are culturally muslim, my parents were friends of a muslim syrian writer who got the Goncourt prize
We already understood you were the kind of "Jean Edouard" who is happy to contempt others people because he goes to opera every weeks but loved having muslim relatives. As I said, cultural diversity? All they way! Social one? No way!
Anyway. If that display of hatred and biggotry is all those attacks inspire people, there is little to hope for.
Seems like people are already tiring at publishing Imagine. 
2- People are absolutely certain that it's a terrorist attack just like the Bataclan. It could, for what we know, be a mass murder from a mentally unstable guy vaguely inspired by ISIS. Just like there are mass shootings in the united state. Fact is it could be, and we don't know.
I give you that, but that was still an occasion to talk about islamic attentats.
- Our right wing team seems to completely disregard the fact that ISIS claims that its goal with those attacks is to mount muslims and non muslims against each other because that's how they recruit. They said it. But our beloved TL far right boys have no problem playing ISIS game and being the useful idiots of islamist terrorists.
And our beloved liberals want more tolerance toward regressive shits, exceptionnal laws for muslims, in fact they want what salafists want, sorry but France has already the national shame of 40s surrender (with a lot people allied with nazis by promoting peace...), a compromission with a totalitarism would be pretty hard to accept, I'm just not ready to live in this world.
For the polish guy who talk about suppressing islam, what about suppressing christianity because of christian fundamentalist nutcases in the states, or the general biggotry, backward ideas about women and gays it inspires to people in, for example, Poland
In theory, it would not be that bad, the core principe of the 3 big monotheists religion is basically soul immortality which implies: "the non believers will burn in hell forever" and it then clearly derivates into collective and organized psychose. Not the best way to a talk about tolerance and I don't even feel the need of talking about all the regressive shits that are into them, it does not mean there are idiots or bad as an individu is not reduced at his religion but still, they believe in sth that might transform in deadly system of thought.
Anyway, as far as I know, gays people do still not get killed and atheism is still allowed, it is not really the same.
|
On July 16 2016 04:13 Stratos_speAr wrote:So they want a complete economic disaster? Because the economic benefits of migrants are pretty thoroughly documented.
Most uneducated post in the thread.
An economic disaster if we don't bring in refugees? Besides you can bring in refugees from places that tend to assimilate better. Sure, there can be some short term costs, but why not look at the long term costs like prison costs, policing costs, welfare, other people feeling alienated, and to some people who care, the fact that with the current status quo, Europe will be a Muslim majority within 100 years?
Same way that there is a short term cost to Britain leaving EU has clear short term implications, but people love to focus on the economy a maximum 5 years down the line and it's what leads to the stupid politics we have in Canada and some EU countries where they hop back and forth.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://puu.sh/q2KzF/67b4bb68da.jpg)
