• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

1 year anniversary of Brussels bombing by Muslims

Capt Caveman said:
I'm guessing the trolling OP is going to create a thread on the OKC bombing anniversary and say by a Christian.
Click to expand...

According to wikipedia, motivation for OKC:

McVeigh and Nichols cited the federal government's actions against the Branch Davidian compound in the 1993 Waco Siege (shown above) as a reason why they perpetrated the Oklahoma City bombing.
The chief conspirators, Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols, met in 1988 at Fort Benning during basic training for the U.S. Army.[17] Michael Fortier, McVeigh's accomplice, was his Army roommate.[18] The three shared interests in survivalism.[19][20] They expressed anger at the federal government's handling of the 1992 Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) standoff with Randy Weaver at Ruby Ridge as well as the Waco siege—a 1993 51-day standoff between the FBI and Branch Davidian members which began with a botched ATF attempt to execute a search warrant leading to a fire fight (it is unknown whether ATF agents or Branch Davidians fired the first shot) and ended with the burning and shooting deaths of David Koresh and 75 others.[21] In March 1993, McVeigh visited the Waco site during the standoff, and then again after its conclusion.[22] McVeigh later decided to bomb a federal building as a response to the raids
Click to expand...

Motivation for Brussels bombing:

Belgium is a participant in the ongoing military intervention against ISIL, during the Iraqi Civil War.[13] On 5 October 2014, a Belgian F-16 dropped its first bomb on an ISIL target, east of Baghdad.[14] On 12 November 2015, Iraq warned members of the coalition that Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of ISIL, had ordered retaliatory attacks on countries involved in the coalition against ISIL.[15]

Belgium has more nationals fighting for jihadist forces as a proportion of its population than any other Western European country, with an estimated 440 Belgians having left for Syria and Iraq as of January 2015.[16][17] Exaggerated reporting claimed Belgium's weak security apparatus and competing intelligence agencies, made it a hub of jihadist-recruiting and terrorist activity.[18] In fact, Belgium faces the same problems as other European countries with regards to jihadist terrorism and the attacks happened more as a result of policy failure rather than intelligence failure
Click to expand...

What's your motivation for asking stupid questions?
 
desura said:
Good job, Europeans, really smart allowing these Muslim enclaves to develop.
Click to expand...
In a sense, you are correct. European countries allowed enclaves (ethnic and sectarian slums) to develop. If a country is going to allow immigration then it follows that economic and social integration of the immigrants should be a goal with thought given to how that will be achieved. People who see a positive future for themselves and their families don't go on killing sprees.
 
justoh said:
According to wikipedia, motivation for OKC:

Motivation for Brussels bombing:

What's your motivation for asking stupid questions?
Click to expand...

So in both cases the attacker was motivated by political concerns?

As I think I mentioned in the other thread, stupid people are rarely good at detecting stupidity in others. You may want to ruminate on whether that applies here.
 
There's no reason for a post like this other than to demonize Muslims.

We get it, desura -- you wish you could wipe Islam off the face of the planet. But that's not going to happen, and most Muslims are peaceful. You're going to have to live with them.
 
IronWing said:
In a sense, you are correct. European countries allowed enclaves (ethnic and sectarian slums) to develop. If a country is going to allow immigration then it follows that economic and social integration of the immigrants should be a goal with thought given to how that will be achieved. People who see a positive future for themselves and their families don't go on killing sprees.
Click to expand...

If you read up on the bombers, one of them shot at police with an assault rifle, was sentenced to ten years in 2010, got out early, and then drew on 25,000 euros of state benefits staying in the country. I'd say that they were excessively nice to them.
 
Commodus said:
There's no reason for a post like this other than to demonize Muslims.

We get it, desura -- you wish you could wipe Islam off the face of the planet. But that's not going to happen, and most Muslims are peaceful. You're going to have to live with them.
Click to expand...

The goal should be to encourage atheism and godlessness among Muslims, and stigmatizing the religion advances that goal.
 
desura said:
The goal should be to encourage atheism and godlessness among Muslims, and stigmatizing the religion advances that goal.
Click to expand...

Maybe you haven't noticed, but slapping someone with a broad stereotype and viciously attacking their most cherished beliefs tends to steel their resolve, not make them change their ways. You aren't going to persuade someone by exhibiting the same sort of hateful behavior you think they perpetrate.

Also, given that Christianity has also been responsible for horrible violence and bigotry over the centuries, when can we expect you to walk into a church and start yelling at the laypeople?
 
fskimospy said:
So in both cases the attacker was motivated by political concerns?

As I think I mentioned in the other thread, stupid people are rarely good at detecting stupidity in others. You may want to ruminate on whether that applies here.
Click to expand...

We're both wrong. In both cases they were motivated by resentment. That seems, after all, like the most salient point. Idiot.
 
Commodus said:
Maybe you haven't noticed, but slapping someone with a broad stereotype and viciously attacking their most cherished beliefs tends to steel their resolve, not make them change their ways. You aren't going to persuade someone by exhibiting the same sort of hateful behavior you think they perpetrate.

Also, given that Christianity has also been responsible for horrible violence and bigotry over the centuries, when can we expect you to walk into a church and start yelling at the laypeople?
Click to expand...

Actually, the broad derision directed towards Christianity has in fact led to declines in church attendance and religiousity in general.

Muslim killings are a contemporary thing. 9-11 was just fifteen years ago. Boston marathon bombing was 2013. The crusades were hundreds of years ago and it takes a lot of reaching and bending over backwards to dig up Christian wrongs.
 
desura said:
Actually, the broad derision directed towards Christianity has in fact led to declines in church attendance and religiousity in general.

Muslim killings are a contemporary thing. 9-11 was just fifteen years ago. Boston marathon bombing was 2013. The crusades were hundreds of years ago and it takes a lot of reaching and bending over backwards to dig up Christian wrongs.
Click to expand...

There are Christian wrongs going on right now. Attacks on reproductive freedom; LGBT discrimination and harassment; anti-Semitic attacks and defacements; white supremacist groups that tie their hatred to Christian values. And in many cases, they point to direct examples in the Bible to justify their actions.

And remember, while religiousness may be on the decline, the fact is that the US is still dominated by religion.

You're arguing for the permanent end to an entire religion based on a temporary pattern (there is no question that Islam has had extended periods of peace, including some benevolence). By that logic, you should be harassing Christians because their religion is doing damage to a lot of people at this very moment, and has a longstanding history of even worse activities. Just because it isn't linked to terrorist bombings doesn't mean it isn't seriously harmful.

Again, this thread only exists out of spite -- vicious, evil spite. It's baffling that you claim to have the moral high ground while maintaining a mean-spirited fixation on the religion, as if getting rid of it would solve all the world's ills. It won't, and doing so would hurt many, many innocent people.
 
Commodus said:
There are Christian wrongs going on right now. Attacks on reproductive freedom; LGBT discrimination and harassment; anti-Semitic attacks and defacements; white supremacist groups that tie their hatred to Christian values. And in many cases, they point to direct examples in the Bible to justify their actions.

And remember, while religiousness may be on the decline, the fact is that the US is still dominated by religion.

You're arguing for the permanent end to an entire religion based on a temporary pattern (there is no question that Islam has had extended periods of peace, including some benevolence). By that logic, you should be harassing Christians because their religion is doing damage to a lot of people at this very moment, and has a longstanding history of even worse activities. Just because it isn't linked to terrorist bombings doesn't mean it isn't seriously harmful.

Again, this thread only exists out of spite -- vicious, evil spite. It's baffling that you claim to have the moral high ground while maintaining a mean-spirited fixation on the religion, as if getting rid of it would solve all the world's ills. It won't, and doing so would hurt many, many innocent people.
Click to expand...

You're really fixated on abortion and gays here? Muslim countries and communities by and large are significantly worse on both fronts.

I'm actually quite tolerant of weird beliefs but I draw the line at intentionally working to maximize civilian deaths like which occurred a year ago in Brussels. You need to be reminded of the true stakes and the true realities. THe Westborough Baptist church are despicable, but how many people have they killed? Yet you quickly equivocate in defense of he truly murderous.
 
Grooveriding said:
OP is a fanatic.
Click to expand...

I thought the same thing, and did a google search to see if there was much news about this "anniversary," and there were a lot of articles posted (though strangely none posted by the OP, just some youtube link that nobody will look at).

I wonder if anyone else had posted a story about it on P&N, with more objective/better/appropriate commentary, whether anyone would have made a fuss about it and called him/her a troll. I doubt it, even though both the OP and this hypothetical poster would have been motivated by a desire to post a thread, which, as we learned from the Brussels and OKC incidents, would be the only thing worth considering. So why all this hypothetical hypocrisy?
 
Last edited:
desura said:
You're really fixated on abortion and gays here? Muslim countries and communities by and large are significantly worse on both fronts.

I'm actually quite tolerant of weird beliefs but I draw the line at intentionally working to maximize civilian deaths like which occurred a year ago in Brussels. You need to be reminded of the true stakes and the true realities. THe Westborough Baptist church are despicable, but how many people have they killed? Yet you quickly equivocate in defense of he truly murderous.
Click to expand...

I'm not defending the "truly murderous," or excusing harsh anti-choice and anti-LGBT views in Muslim communities. I'm saying that most Muslims are not violent, and that posts like this are meant to deliberately mischaracterize the entire Muslim population.

You act as if every Muslim, whether they're a 3rd-generation Iranian-American or a freshly-landed Syrian refugee, is a ticking time bomb just waiting for the right excuse to go on a rampage. This is, and will always be, untrue. A lot of the terrorism perpetrated these days is committed by Muslims, but demonizing the whole religion is an overreaction with dangerous consequences. You're not only glossing over other issues that may play into terrorism (such as economic hardship and foreign policy), but openly encouraging harassment and violence against innocent people.

You know full well that there have been attacks in North America prompted by anti-Muslim hysteria -- people have even been killed because they looked like they might be Muslim. Why worsen that by portraying every adherent as a boogeyman?
 
Commodus said:
There's no reason for a post like this other than to demonize Muslims.

We get it, desura -- you wish you could wipe Islam off the face of the planet. But that's not going to happen, and most Muslims are peaceful. You're going to have to live with them.
Click to expand...
As if the OP isn't already getting his ass handed to him, his ugliness reflected back on him. Threads like this do nothing to promote the ideology of hate and exclusion. They only reveal its pathetic inadequacy, its cowardly smallness.
 
justoh said:
I wonder if anyone else had posted a story about it on P&N, with more objective/better/appropriate commentary, whether anyone would have made a fuss about it and called him/her a troll.
Click to expand...
Well, it could depend on their posting history. Like it did in this case, if one posts many threads/comments that are perceived as trollish, it's not surprising to be thought of as a troll.
 
fskimospy said:
So in both cases the attacker was motivated by political concerns?

As I think I mentioned in the other thread, stupid people are rarely good at detecting stupidity in others. You may want to ruminate on whether that applies here.
Click to expand...

What? Islam itself doesn't play a role? Only apologetic morons ignore the role of Islam.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top