I agree with this pretty much to a “t”
Here in lies the problem. These pieces of shit are terrorists because they lack the necessary resources to become a state and/or caliphate. So they prey on fear and we actually help them by broadcasting it on every channel. It’s an interesting conundrum with real world implications.
Can’t really blame the news channels. Whenever there is a attack there is a huge spike of the ratings.
They do prey on fear and fear is very powerful.
I’m unsure what the government will do, if anything, other than a typical “terrorism is bad, be nice, we stand together” statement by leaders then no further actions.
Sure I can. They’re as responsible for the content they air as I am for what I type here. Reporting facts are one thing. Being salacious for ratings is another.
1 Like
They report on what gets views, not what is important.
The majority of news networks and corporations have horribly skewed practices anyway.
For example calling the clearly Arab man a Asian as to not make people assume the religion of the attack.
Very rarely , if ever, will the public get a unbiased view of world events.
2 Likes
Sure, in many/most cases and that’s part of the problem.
Attacks are just part of the process of the replacement of one dying culture (WHITE) British with another Arab Islamic.
Attacks symbolize submission to Islam
I feel like attacks symbolize the intent to push submission to Islam, and that submission to Islam is entirely on the side of those that respond to it.
I’m sure your statement could have been more wrong, but I’m not sure how.
3 Likes
The attacks are meant to create fear in non-Muslims, however, at it should be, it creates fear of Muslims in non-Muslims.
Agreed, but the attacks can’t symbolize submission to Islam because submission to Islam is entirely dependent on our reaction (In raj’s analogy, in mine it would mean submission to terrorists, as terrorists do not represent the whole of Islam)
Yes we shouldn’t be submissive at all. Our reaction should be condolences then immediate action to prevent further attacks which are very likely at this time.
Muslims are hijacking gifts of the West and weaponizing them
Democracy —> they breed like bunnies to build in numbers and sway society to their preferences
Equality —> they know the collective will treat them as equals no matter how feral their religious and cultural practices are .
Innocent until proven guilty —> Europeans will not punish without a trial. this doesn’t happen in other parts of the world
No cruel and unusual punishment —> Muslims don’t have to worry about ramifications of their actions on their family. In other countries like Israel they will actually bulldoze people’s houses just on suspicion of terrorism alone
I can’t remember a time in my lifetime where we’ve ever been submissive to terrorists, can’t see why we’d start now
I mean society as a whole. Like the bullshit of people supporting Islam after the Orlando shooting. This religion strongly advocates killing non-believers and people in masses supported Muslims after their religious teachings caused these acts.
Its been revealed the Westminster terrorist was inspired by Islamist beliefs.
Do you also believe the holocaust should be blamed on Christianity or does the “blame the religion” card only apply to Muslim terror?
I feel like if an individual bastardizes a religion to meet their goals, you blame the individual, not the religion that got bastardized.
No I don’t blame Christians, just as I don’t blame Muslims for the acts of a few.
In the bastardization case, it’s not just the Individual having his own take on the religion, its the fact that this religion has led to such things as:
Over half of British Muslims thinking Homosexuality should be illegal. Compared to 5% of regular British people.
and 23% wanting sharia law in the UK.
This is why I think the religion is bastardized.
Would you be opposed to comparing that to Christian Americans wanting to outlaw gay marriage?
Religion shapes personal beliefs, personal beliefs shapes law preferences, therefore Religion shapes law preference. This isn’t unique to Islam.
If your comment is that all religious people shouldn’t bring their religion into law creation, I’m 100% on board with you.
“It is wrong to describe this as Islamic terrorism. It is Islamist terrorism. It is a perversion of a great faith.” - Theresa May
See what I mean?
He’s Pakistani, not Arab. Hence the label Asian.
But in general, the term “Asian” is misleading - in the US it denotes Japanese/Chinese/Korean/Taiwanese while in the UK it’s a code word for Pakistanis/Bangladeshi
Terrorist attacks are usually under reported - for every ISIS terrorist attack against Western targets there are several against “infidel” shias with dozens, sometimes hundreds of casualties which barely get a mention in the Western press.
First and foremost, the term “terrorist” is a purely recent Western invention, conspicuously lacking from 1300 years of ongoing shia/sunni conflict. Yesterday’s “terrorists”, hedchoppers and suicide bombers of Al-Qaeda (rebranded most recently JaT) are currently fighting a conventional war (with the occasional suicide bombing) against the Iranian Revolutionary Guard and Hezbollah, both “terrorist” organizations. The latter in turn use chlorine gas and try to kill as much sunnis as possible.
Secondly, it’s three religions actually - salafi (Saudi Arabia, ISIS, Gulfs states), remnants of Ottoman sunni (middle class Turkey/Lebanon, parts of Morocco) and shia (Iran, parts of Syria and Iraq).
1 Like
He was born in Kent, I believe.
I wrote that before the information was revealed to the public.
Not sure about this where I live, Asians are generally the US description here, while those of Pakistani decent are called “Paki” which is racist(I don’t call people this).
The Western world has a habit of blowing terrorist attacks here well out of proportion, meanwhile blowing the shit out of the places where terrorism takes place.
The definition of terrorist “a person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.” is not used like that there in the West, however. It’s used in broad terms for anyone who is a bit brown and kills innocents.