Whites man Posted July 3, 2017 Posted July 3, 2017 On reflection I think this argument is a bit of the cul-de-sac, most people without an axe to grind would agree on what is and what is not terrorism. Quote
madthatter Posted July 3, 2017 Posted July 3, 2017 the Yorkshire ripper was a serial killer getting his rocks off killing woman in the current climate, until proven otherwise, you could presume (if you want) the acid attack was targeting muslims in response to recent events, making it political or at the very least ideological / relgious the only difference is the scale of the attacks IMO, but seems the messages are clear (well, not in the case of the acid attack yet, but I'm sure they'll find out more in time) call it what you want, they're all cunts tricks Aye but my point is if we label anything that causes terror terrorism then a drunk driver becomes a terrorist ffs! I think we're in agreement in the main and we have to be very careful that such attacks on Muslims do not become a deliberate ideology of some group or other. As it stands they are isolated as far as I am aware. ISIS/Jihadist attacks aren't Until that happens I'll desist from calling such acts terrorism. Quote
madthatter Posted July 3, 2017 Posted July 3, 2017 On reflection I think this argument is a bit of the cul-de-sac, most people without an axe to grind would agree on what is and what is not terrorism. Snow flake? I actually think it is one of the most important distinctions we face at the moment hence my participation. Many don't agree or find such definitions confusing or misleading that's the point. Quote
ZiggyStardust Posted July 3, 2017 Posted July 3, 2017 On reflection I think this argument is a bit of the cul-de-sac, most people without an axe to grind would agree on what is and what is not terrorism. Not too sure its an axe to grind per se, more a case of wanting to argue for the sake of arguing. Quote
Youri McAnespie Posted July 3, 2017 Posted July 3, 2017 (edited) The muslim hierarchy refuse to condemn them or deem them heretics though, apart from almost always... https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=/amp/s/www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/528648/&ved=0ahUKEwjw2M6rnu3UAhXhKcAKHTxTANQQFggcMAA&usg=AFQjCNGMCAgdL6Fbzez3OXufntugZ2WLbw In my opinion if a loon is motivated to take action by propaganda etc. in any form then it's terrorism. Those behind the propaganda will consider it a success (when it is a 'success') regardless of the mental state of the perpetrator. They're all fucking mentally ill in my book anyway - to the point of needing a 9mm lobotomy. Edited July 3, 2017 by Youri McAnespie Quote
madthatter Posted July 3, 2017 Posted July 3, 2017 (edited) The muslim hierarchy refuse to condemn them or deem them heretics though, apart from almost always... https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=/amp/s/www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/528648/&ved=0ahUKEwjw2M6rnu3UAhXhKcAKHTxTANQQFggcMAA&usg=AFQjCNGMCAgdL6Fbzez3OXufntugZ2WLbw In my opinion if a loon is motivated to take action by propaganda etc. in any form then it's terrorism. Those behind the propaganda will consider it a success (when it is a 'success') regardless of the mental state of the perpetrator. They're all fucking mentally ill in my book anyway - to the point of needing a 9mm lobotomy. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/afp/article-4479746/Egypt-Azhar-university-head-replaced-apostacy-remarks.html I know it's the Mail but still. (see those Douglas Murray posts earlier in the thread - he explains this much better than I can) This is what I mean by the hierarchy not Mosques in minority Muslim states. Couldn't agree more with the last bit Edited July 3, 2017 by madthatter Quote
madthatter Posted July 3, 2017 Posted July 3, 2017 Not too sure its an axe to grind per se, more a case of wanting to argue for the sake of arguing. Oh the irony Quote
bolty58 Posted July 3, 2017 Posted July 3, 2017 Aye but my point is if we label anything that causes terror terrorism then a drunk driver becomes a terrorist ffs! I think we're in agreement in the main and we have to be very careful that such attacks on Muslims do not become a deliberate ideology of some group or other. As it stands they are isolated as far as I am aware. ISIS/Jihadist attacks aren't Until that happens I'll desist from calling such acts terrorism. A sensible distinction in my view. I would imagine that we all agree that the Finsbury Park attack, acid throwing, Jo Cox murder etc. are all heinous crimes but clearly are not the work of an organised group planning or imploring acts of death and destruction all over the world. Rather they are misguided 'revenge' attacks carried out by none too bright nutjobs who perceive an avalanche of Islamic extremist atrocities on an almost daily basis as being almost unchallenged and for some inexplicable reason decide to act in a futile and nonsensical way. Don't lose sight of the real issue here. Heinous as they are, these are microbeads in an ocean of murderous horror being waged by extremist followers of one faith and one faith only. Quote
Zico Posted July 3, 2017 Posted July 3, 2017 In my opinion if a loon is motivated to take action by propaganda etc. in any form then it's terrorism. that's where I'm at - it's not the scale or the outcome, it's why they did it I've no doubt this acid chap will have extreme right views and be found to get involved in the propaganda of such at some point in the near future he didn't just fancy pouring acid in someone's face for the sake of it, he didn't get into an argument with someone and retaliated he will have had a belief and acted on it following on from recent events Quote
Zico Posted July 3, 2017 Posted July 3, 2017 Aye but my point is if we label anything that causes terror terrorism then a drunk driver becomes a terrorist ffs! aye but no is doing that, are they? Quote
madthatter Posted July 3, 2017 Posted July 3, 2017 aye but no is doing that, are they? Well that's kind of what the whole discussion is about; but not yet, no. I just think it's dangerous to label such isolated incidents as terrorism as, in my view, they aren't. Where does it stop? How useful are such definitions? Quote
Zico Posted July 3, 2017 Posted July 3, 2017 Well that's kind of what the whole discussion is about; but not yet, no. I just think it's dangerous to label such isolated incidents as terrorism as, in my view, they aren't. Where does it stop? How useful are such definitions? I guess then it comes down whether or not you view them as isolated, in addition to thinking about why the attacks were carried out, and whether the scale is relevant Anders Brevik was technically isolated, but he was a terrorist the numerous mass shootings in America are not isolated, but aren't terrorist incidents it is what it is, give it a name Quote
tomski Posted July 3, 2017 Posted July 3, 2017 I can't help but feel if we don't label these as terror incidents then we will alienate the community we are trying to get on board more so. Quote
madthatter Posted July 3, 2017 Posted July 3, 2017 I can't help but feel if we don't label these as terror incidents then we will alienate the community we are trying to get on board more so. That's the rub for me and why this label is used, imo. I think there is something in that logic but I also think it's potentially dangerous and if we're not careful could lead to the opposite of what you're implying. i.e. denial, blame shifting etc My new bessy mate, DM, makes an interesting point: Where Muslims are minorities they preach minority rights. When in a majority, they actively punish minorities. I wonder, and I stress wonder, if Islam became the majority religion here would homosexuality be permitted? As we know the Church influences policy such as on gay marriage. What I'm getting at is truths need to be faced up to and Muslims living here need to acknowledge what is clearly a larger picture; and yes, Islam (or one interpretation of it) is the cause. That, sadly, is undeniable. Quote
only1swanny Posted July 3, 2017 Posted July 3, 2017 https://www.facebook.com/UKSpotttedAsians/photos/a.719067558208742.1073741829.717975524984612/1353246658124159/?type=3&theater interesting read.. When a group defended by the liberal left, is discriminated by another group defended by the liberal left... who is wrong?? read the story about the blokes mum further up on the page... shocking stuff what some have wrote... Quote
miamiwhite Posted July 3, 2017 Posted July 3, 2017 That's the rub for me and why this label is used, imo. I think there is something in that logic but I also think it's potentially dangerous and if we're not careful could lead to the opposite of what you're implying. i.e. denial, blame shifting etc My new bessy mate, DM, makes an interesting point: Where Muslims are minorities they preach minority rights. When in a majority, they actively punish minorities. I wonder, and I stress wonder, if Islam became the majority religion here would homosexuality be permitted? As we know the Church influences policy such as on gay marriage. What I'm getting at is truths need to be faced up to and Muslims living here need to acknowledge what is clearly a larger picture; and yes, Islam (or one interpretation of it) is the cause. That, sadly, is undeniable. If Muslims were the majority here, they would definitely punish minorities as per their outdated Sharia Law bollocks. This would be followed by white genocide as per their outdated Koran. That's why it must never happen. As simple as that. History proves this. Quote
madthatter Posted July 3, 2017 Posted July 3, 2017 (edited) https://www.facebook.com/UKSpotttedAsians/photos/a.719067558208742.1073741829.717975524984612/1353246658124159/?type=3&theater interesting read.. When a group defended by the liberal left, is discriminated by another group defended by the liberal left... who is wrong?? read the story about the blokes mum further up on the page... shocking stuff what some have wrote... Not even referenced . . . shameful plagiarism Areeba Lewis Changaz God made Adam n eve not Adam n Steven ... gayness is not accepted in Islam so if a raised Muslim decides to be gay he was lead astray he isn't and can't be Muslim Very thought provoking question that, Swanny. I'd be interested to hear the opinions of a few on this thread. Wait, hang on, I might not like them and then have to go and sit in my safe space . . . titters Edited July 3, 2017 by madthatter Quote
Winchester White Posted July 3, 2017 Posted July 3, 2017 Adam and Eve... do people really believe such shite? Quote
Whites man Posted July 3, 2017 Posted July 3, 2017 Adam and Eve... do people really believe such shite? The DUP do. Quote
only1swanny Posted July 3, 2017 Posted July 3, 2017 i doubt old testament is really a part of Islamic readings.. seen as they hate Jew's so much, that Facebook page has some tinder for anti-islamic sentiments Quote
miamiwhite Posted July 3, 2017 Posted July 3, 2017 Watching,sky news about that traitor Sally Jones who is a recruiter for IS and now wants to come home from Raqqa. She should be locked up for life for treason if our stupid government allow the tramp back here. Utterly disgusting. Quote
Traf Posted July 3, 2017 Posted July 3, 2017 Let her come home and throw her in prison on the rapists wing. Quote
Whites man Posted July 3, 2017 Posted July 3, 2017 Let her come home and throw her in prison on the rapists wing. That's the kind of shit ISIS do. Quote
madthatter Posted July 3, 2017 Posted July 3, 2017 That's the kind of shit ISIS do. She'll feel right at home then Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.