Shootings and explosions in Paris.

  • Thread starter Dennisch
  • 915 comments
  • 46,896 views
Incidentally, on the same day, 40 people were killed in two terrorist attacks - by Da'esh - in Beirut. This was covered with a 20 second report in the regular news bulletin in the middle of the Spain-England football match.


I'll also note that the previous day, all of Britain was rejoicing in the execution without trial of British citizen by drone strike.
 
This article was written 5 days ago by Ayaan Hirsi Ali. Interesting and on point.

http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/11/09...iolence-ayaan-hirsi-ali-debate-islamic-state/
Informative article. A few snippets:

The view that the ideology of radical Islam is rooted in Islamic scripture understands fully the cause of terrorism; it takes religious arguments seriously, and does not view them as a mere smokescreen for underlying “real” motivations, such as socio-economic grievances. This school of thought understands that the problem of radicalization begins long before a suicide bomber straps on his vest or a militant picks up his machine gun; it begins in mosques and schools where imams preach hate, intolerance, and adherence to Medina Islam.

if we are to defeat the ideology we cannot focus only on violent extremism. We need to confront the nonviolent preaching of sharia and martyrdom that precedes all acts of jihad.

We will not win by stamping out the Islamic State or al Qaeda or Boko Haram or al-Shabab; a new radical group will just pop up somewhere else. We will win only if we engage with the ideology of Islamist extremism, and counter the message of death, intolerance, and the pursuit of the afterlife with our own far preferable message of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
 
Informative article. A few snippets:

The view that the ideology of radical Islam is rooted in Islamic scripture understands fully the cause of terrorism; it takes religious arguments seriously, and does not view them as a mere smokescreen for underlying “real” motivations, such as socio-economic grievances. This school of thought understands that the problem of radicalization begins long before a suicide bomber straps on his vest or a militant picks up his machine gun; it begins in mosques and schools where imams preach hate, intolerance, and adherence to Medina Islam.

if we are to defeat the ideology we cannot focus only on violent extremism. We need to confront the nonviolent preaching of sharia and martyrdom that precedes all acts of jihad.

We will not win by stamping out the Islamic State or al Qaeda or Boko Haram or al-Shabab; a new radical group will just pop up somewhere else. We will win only if we engage with the ideology of Islamist extremism, and counter the message of death, intolerance, and the pursuit of the afterlife with our own far preferable message of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

As a counter to that article in a truthful view and a view from someone who has done a proper bunch of study on Islam (especially recently).
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/islam-whats-your-view-on-it.263208/page-86#post-11051652
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/islam-whats-your-view-on-it.263208/page-88#post-11079032
I ask you to read these posts please, which covers this and also refers to the Locke natural rights, which were then adapted slightly and written on the Declaration of Indepenence. (Not being quoted here as to keep this on topic with the horrific attacks in Paris.)
 
I'll also note that the previous day, all of Britain was rejoicing in the execution without trial of British citizen by drone strike.
After what the man did (and for all terrorists and major criminals), does he really deserve a trial?
If they caught him, he should just be thrown into prison for life. The death penalty (is it even legal in Europe?) is pointless with terrorists.
 
After what the man did (and for all terrorists and major criminals), does he really deserve a trial?
If they caught him, he should just be thrown into prison for life, the death penalty (is it even legal in Europe? is pointless with terrorists).

Part of me wants to agree with you, but if we throw our justice system out the window just because we know the outcome, does that not make (for that moment) as bad as they are?
 
Incidentally, on the same day, 40 people were killed in two terrorist attacks - by Da'esh - in Beirut. This was covered with a 20 second report in the regular news bulletin in the middle of the Spain-England football match.


I'll also note that the previous day, all of Britain was rejoicing in the execution without trial of British citizen by drone strike.
We were rejoicing were we? First i've heard of it. Most of us might of been glad he was killed but rejoicing? C'mon!
 
Why were the vaunted intelligence services of France caught flat-footed?

It may be they were overwhelmed by the thousands of their own citizens being radicalized in Syria, or by the millions of refugees providing cover.

But maybe the underlying reason is social media - Twitter and the like - that provided the instantaneous communication network crucial to the recruitment and organization of the attackers? If these attackers were forced to rely on snail mail and old-fashioned shortwave radio sets, then at least they would be slowed way down.
 
Part of me wants to agree with you, but if we throw our justice system out the window just because we know the outcome, does that not make (for that moment) as bad as they are?
When you are at war you don't take your opponent to trial, you just kill them because they are trying to kill you.

ISIS is claiming responsibility..not sure if this has been reported yet.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/14/world/paris-attacks/index.html

As for a potential connection to the Syrian refugees, Fox is reporting that a Syrian passport was found on one of the terrorists:
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2015/1...shootout-and-explosion-in-paris/?intcmp=hpbt1
The accompanying video references an arrest in Bavaria tied to the attack. As usual, it's still early and lots of this information may prove ultimately to be premature.
 
Last edited:
When you are at war you don't take your opponent to trial, you just kill them because they are trying to kill you.

Again, 100% true. However, we are not exactly at war (though sadly officially being at war may be the only way to rid the planet of this. Now, am I sad that he was killed? I am sad a human was killed but that is as far as my sadness goes. Did he deserve to be killed? Again, most likely yes. However, does that mean we should all be rejoicing? (which I did not see directly @Famine but I did see on many news sites, whilst the Beruit attacks were barely a footnote, but that is for a different discussion). I do not think so. Does that mean that an attempt to capture him should not have been made? Debateable. That being said, my repsonse was not directly referring to that one terrorist, but as to captured criminals in general. When it comes to war, if they are trying to kill you, I cannot argue that you cannot defend yourself by striking back...
 
Why would a suicide bomber bring their passport with them?
Because they aren't very bright? You're asking a logical question about a person who strapped a bomb to his chest in order to kill strangers. Logic doesn't always apply. As I said, it's still early, none of the information is really 100% confirmed at this point.
 
We were rejoicing were we? First i've heard of it. Most of us might of been glad he was killed but rejoicing? C'mon!
If you accept the summary execution of your fellow citizen, then I think you must also accept the principles that "the ends justify the means" and "might makes right". And now you are ready for enrollment in the School of Machiavelli.
 
Because they aren't very bright? You're asking a logical question about a person who strapped a bomb to his chest in order to kill strangers. Logic doesn't always apply. As I said, it's still early, none of the information is really 100% confirmed at this point.
How high of a IQ is required to remember to empty your pockets before becoming a "martyr"? Roughly the same number that is required to find the spot you are going to blow up and detonate the bomb.

Syrian passport found on bomber does make for a nice headline if you are trying to sell a narrative to the public.💡
 
Reports of a TGV train crash in Eckwersheim, five dead.


Not sure if it was a terrorist attack, but that's a strange coincidence if it's just an accident.
 
How high of a IQ is required to remember to empty your pockets before becoming a "martyr"? Roughly the same number that is required to find the spot you are going to blow up and detonate the bomb.

Syrian passport found on bomber does make for a nice headline if you are trying to sell a narrative to the public.💡
How high is your IQ that you would strap a bomb to yourself to blow up strangers on behalf of a fairy in the sky so you can have sex with a bunch of virgins after you are dead?
 
Reports of a TGV train crash in Eckwersheim, five dead.


Not sure if it was a terrorist attack, but that's a strange coincidence if it's just an accident.


Seems to be a test train, no passengers on board.

 
How high is your IQ that you would strap a bomb to yourself to blow up strangers on behalf of a fairy in the sky so you can have sex with a bunch of virgins after you are dead?
This. They believe it for real. And some of us are still protecting them.
 
I'd say because they're brainless morons and don't think about something like this?

You could say that, but Id argue that people with the capability to orchestrate an event like this without being detected by security forces we not 'brainless' although the act may well be described that way by many.

What bothers me is that if the claim by ISIS that they were involved turns out to be correct then it's a sad day for the majority of the Muslim population who aren't in support of what ISIS are doing in the name of their God and faith.

To label such acts of violence as barbaric and despicable add nothing to a solution. The EU needs to seriously think on this and act accordingly, although I fear it will be lots of thinking and discussion at the expense of action.

I also fear that the people in power are too restrained by either political correctness or presenting a poor self-image to do anything that would really make a difference.
 
You could say that, but Id argue that people with the capability to orchestrate an event like this without being detected by security forces we not 'brainless' although the act may well be described that way by many.

There's probably a bunch of chicken***** orchestrating the attacks, carried out by easily brainwashed retards, who are too scared to blow up themselves.
 
Imagine if there are 1% of them that are ISIS terrorists under cover. Only 1% ok?
On a refugee stream of 1 million that means 10.000 of them entering Europe now. And you saw yesterday what only 8 can accomplish.
But it's less than 1% that are terrorists.


Also, the amount of lives saved by letting in refugees is higher than the amount killed in the Paris attacks.
 
After what the man did (and for all terrorists and major criminals), does he really deserve a trial?
After what Nathan Matthews did, does he really deserve a trial?
After what Harold Shipman did, does he really deserve a trial?
After what Rolf Harris did, does he really deserve a trial?
After what Ian Watkins did, does he really deserve a trial?

At what point do you draw the line and say "this person does not deserve a trial due to the magnitude of their crime"? Of course that's exactly what a trial is for - to establish guilt (from the presumption of innocence) of the crime in the first place.

That notwithstanding, there is no crime in the UK for which one can be found guilty that carries with it the sentence of execution.


Extrajudicially executing one of our own citizens is a complete abandonment of every principle of law and establishes an extremely dangerous precedent - you can be executed without trial anywhere on Earth for being an enemy of the state.

Of course that statement itself would be classed as seditious, so now I'm in the crosshairs...
When you are at war you don't take your opponent to trial, you just kill them because they are trying to kill you.
What war?

The UK killed a British citizen with a drone strike in Syria. No part of that is war to my knowledge.

Perhaps we declared war on Da'esh at some point?
 
Whats the saddest thing of all (or the most frightening), is that our governments can basically do nothing to stop this. An arrest here or there from an undermanned secret service and flexing some muscle in the streets a couple of weeks after an attack, so the average Joe feels something is being done and that's it.... until the next time they attack.
 
Back