Hostage taking in Australia?

[BubberMiley]

And yet there are still people who act as apologists. Give yourselves a shake.

I've yet to hear anyone act as an apologist for ISIS in any media report I've read. Who are you referring to?

[PrimeNumber]

Why is an Iranian showing support for ISIS? This is all very weird. Religious Iranians are enemies of ISIS and their brand of Islam and vice versa.

I think Iran is almost completely Shia but there's a large chance that this guy is a Sunni Muslim which is more or less what ISIS is mostly made up of. Those with radicalized ideas of Islam often come from the Sunni side of Islam. Not always evidently but more often than not.

[marcus]

I don't think anyone who wants to justify war against ISIS needs this kind of idiot to help them with it.

It's to justify war against a lump. This peculiar and ironic, so-called "Iranian ISIS supporter", will make it more simple to lump Iran and ISIS together and will give the Islamophobes, who need any excuse to scream "OMG! YOU CALL THIS THE RELIGION OF PEACE?! LEt'S DROP AN A-BOMB ON THEM!!!!111".

Edited December 15, 2014 by marcus

[Guest]

It's to justify war against a lump. This peculiar and ironic, so-called "Iranian ISIS supporter", will make it more simple to lump Iran and ISIS together and will give the Islamophobes, who need any excuse to scream "OMG! YOU CALL THIS THE RELIGION OF PEACE?! LEt'S DROP AN A-BOMB ON THEM!!!!111".

Do you really think that? Do you really think anyone is going to try and justify a nuclear attack on Iran based on a takeover of a chocolate shop in Australia?

Edited December 15, 2014 by bcsapper

[Big Guy]

The latest reports I hear is that the gunman demanded an ISIS flag and a phone call to the Australian PM. I hope that is not the case. If it was, why not give this nutter his flag and a chance to talk to the PM. If then he proceeded with more demands then go to plan B. I hope that these 2 innocent hostages did not die because the PM didn't want to talk to this guy.

[Keepitsimple]

I've yet to hear anyone act as an apologist for ISIS in any media report I've read. Who are you referring to?

Open your eyes and ears - even on this board. Those who trip over themselves trying to separate Islam from ISIS, for one. And those who immediately try to separate terrorism from these recent incidents by calling the perpetrators mentally unstable. Of course they are demented, brainwashed, defective. Who else would chop off heads, kill babies and indescriminately maim and kill! These are exactly the type of lone-wolf radicals that ISIS wants to embrace. Sociopaths steeped in ideology and full of hatred.

[Hudson Jones]

Who gives a F about the religion and ethnicity of this guy in Australia. What ever happened to crazy? You can't be crazy anymore?

Edited December 15, 2014 by Hudson Jones

[BubberMiley]

Open your eyes and ears - even on this board. Those who trip over themselves trying to separate Islam from ISIS, for one.

I don't see how that is apologizing for anything. But I do think that those who would try to equate Islam with lone-wolf psychos are creating a larger enemy than exists, thereby acting as useful idiots for the likes of ISIS who want nothing more than to have their radical extremist views equated with Islam as a whole.

So way to go.

[Big Guy]

It is estimated that ISIS currently consists of 20,000 to 30,000 troops. That's a lot of demented, brainwashed and defective folks. Apparently they also have the support of the locals who are mostly Sunnis. That makes that whole area susceptible to the nutso virus.

To chop off heads, kill babies and indiscriminately maim and kill is inhuman - except the West and Canada have already dropped bombs in that region that have exploded innocent bodies, killed babies and maimed thousands of civilians. That type of bombing to instill terror in the populace works. It worked for Israel in Gaza (a couple of times), in Iraq and Afghanistan and that special mission that ended a war - the roasting and toasting of 200,000 civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

The greatest mistake we can make is to underestimate our enemy.

Edited December 15, 2014 by Big Guy

[Hudson Jones]

Do you really think that? Do you really think anyone is going to try and justify a nuclear attack on Iran based on a takeover of a chocolate shop in Australia?

Marcus is right. Scribble has already laid down the beginning of the narrative with her "religion of peace.." comment. If you look at other threads, there are people condoning what Sheldon Adelson is saying about dropping nuclear bombs on Iran.

[Guest]

Marcus is right. Scribble has already laid down the beginning of the narrative with her "religion of peace.." comment. If you look at other threads, there are people condoning what Sheldon Adelson is saying about dropping nuclear bombs on Iran.

No, he's not right. In fact, he seems a little hysterical, to be honest, just looking at the post I replied to.

[Guest]

Who gives a **** about the religion and ethnicity of this guy in Australia. What ever happened to crazy? You can't be crazy anymore?

It does seem to have link to religion though, given the flag he had them hold up. Or are you suggesting that, if he were alive to ask, he would say his religion and ethnicity had absolutely nothing to do with his actions?

Edited December 15, 2014 by bcsapper
Profanity

[Michael Hardner]

Hey people - there is a rule against profanity here. Please remove it from your posts thank you.

[Keepitsimple]

I don't see how that is apologizing for anything. But I do think that those who would try to equate Islam with lone-wolf psychos are creating a larger enemy than exists, thereby acting as useful idiots for the likes of ISIS who want nothing more than to have their radical extremist views equated with Islam as a whole.

So way to go.

Be honest with yourself. If the two Canadian terrorists had not taken up Islamic ideology, do you think they would have done what they did? We ignore that fact at our own peril.

[Black Dog]

No - these are exactly the type of people ISIS wants on board. You have to be half-crazy to want to chop heads off and kill babies. They want people who will inflict maximum damage without remorse. Nutters = ISIS. ISIS = nutters

No, I think everyone has the capacity to commit those kinds of acts. ISIS is pretty mundane as far as evil goes.

Open your eyes and ears - even on this board. Those who trip over themselves trying to separate Islam from ISIS, for one.

So you think ISIS is representative of Islam and all its nearly 3 billion adherents (including those Muslims who are actually on the front lines fighting them)?

And those who immediately try to separate terrorism from these recent incidents by calling the perpetrators mentally unstable.

The two aren't mutually exclusive, but it's worth pointing out the difference between a lone psychopath who uses a particular cause a s a channel for their issues and an actual organized act of terrorism.

Of course they are demented, brainwashed, defective. Who else would chop off heads, kill babies and indescriminately maim and kill!

Nice tautology, but in real life, there's no neat boxes for "crazy murders" and "normal folks."

[Hudson Jones]

It does seem to have link to religion though, given the flag he had them hold up. Or are you suggesting that, if he were alive to ask, he would say his religion and ethnicity had absolutely nothing to do with his actions?

The religion does not control a person. A person controls a person and in this case, their insanity and chemical imbalance contribute to their actions.

When a devout Jewish man and also terrorist goes into a mosque and machine guns dozens of people, we shouldn't blame Judaism for his actions. I think you would agree with that. Any person who uses a person's actions or a group's actions to condemn millions of people who call themselves Jewish, or Muslim or Christian or Buddhist or Pastafaria or etc. is wrong.

So for Scribbletters to come in here and utter the words: "The religion of peace..", to laid the groundwork for another attack on 1.5 billion people and to rouse more Islamophobia, is wrong.

Edited December 15, 2014 by Hudson Jones

[Guest]

So you think ISIS is representative of Islam and all its nearly 3 billion adherents (including those Muslims who are actually on the front lines fighting them)?

Why does that have to be a yes or no question? There are many facets to Islam. That the majority of the world's Muslims are ordinary peace loving folks is not in question. That ISIS is an Islamic organisation is also not in question. That there are varying degrees of fundamentalism in between is also not in question.

It's okay to be critical of Islam, regardless of whether it's the use of a passage from the Koran to separate out those for execution, or the refusal of a society to allow a woman to go unescorted to a volleyball match.

Edited December 15, 2014 by bcsapper

[Wilber]

Sounds like Martin Place is quite a popular place with tourists and workers.

Yup, it's a main pedestrian thoroughfare connecting the hospital, NSW Parliament and govt offices with George St, which is kind of Sydney's main drag. Busy when folks get off work.

[Guest]

The religion does not control a person. A person controls a person or their insanity and chemical imbalance controls their actions.

When a devout Jewish man and also terrorist goes into a mosque and machine guns dozens of people, we shouldn't blame Judaism for his actions. I think you would agree with that. Any person who uses a person's actions or a group's actions to condemn millions of people who call themselves Jewish, or Muslim or Christian or Buddhist or Pastafaria or etc. is wrong.

So for Scribbletters to come in here and utter the words: "The religion of peace..", to laid the groundwork for another attack on 1.5 billion people and to rouse more Islamophobia, is wrong.

Of course the condemning is wrong. See my post two above. The refusal to ascribe a person's actions to their religious beliefs when they are the primary reason for their actions due to some misguided notion that it will tar all people of that religion with the same brush is also wrong.

[Hudson Jones]

Of course the condemning is wrong. See my post two above.

Okay. We seem to agree that (edited): Scribbler and any person who would do what she does is wrong.

I also fully agree that every religion and ideology should be talked about and dissected.

Edited December 15, 2014 by Hudson Jones

[scribblet]

Marcus is right. Scribble has already laid down the beginning of the narrative with her "religion of peace.." comment. If you look at other threads, there are people condoning what Sheldon Adelson is saying about dropping nuclear bombs on Iran.

It's scribblet thanks, and never said or inferred a narrative that we should drop nuclear bombs on anyone, so don't impute words or intent that were not there.

He did write"Islam is the religion of peace," on the web, hours before before siege began and thge Arabic writing on his headband reads: We are your soldiers O Muhammad - but yeah – there’s no link to radical Islam.

The other question is why on earth was he still in the country after all his criminal activities.

[scribblet]

Okay. We seem to agree that Dribbles and any person who would do what she does is wrong.

I also fully agree that every religion and ideology should be talked about and dissected.

#1, it's against the rules to deliberately change a poster's name. It's a deliberate and nefarious attempt to smear a poster rather than address the subject.

[BubberMiley]

#1, it's against the rules to deliberately change a poster's name. It's a deliberate and nefarious attempt to smear a poster rather than address the subject.

It's also against the rules to call out people on the rules....which means I'm breaking the rules too.

But it's nice to see people taking back their earlier comments and clarifying they mean radical islam and not just your garden variety islam.

[dre]

The religion does not control a person. A person controls a person or their insanity and chemical imbalance controls their actions.

Its useful crowd control though. Religious people are relatively easily lead, especially against members of other religions. And abrahamites (jews, christians, muslims) that believe life here on earth is just a temporary stop on the way to the "real" place, are obviously going to be a little less concerned with the death of others.

[Hudson Jones]

Its useful crowd control though. Religious people are relatively easily lead, especially against members of other religions. And abrahamites (jews, christians, muslims) that believe life here on earth is just a temporary stop on the way to the "real" place, are obviously going to be a little less concerned with the death of others.

I hear you, but if not religion, then it will be something else. They're just story books, where too many people take seriously and interpret into whatever they want and give their own little twist to it. Then you get nutbars who are easily moved by the interpretation of these fantasy books and they find an excuse to release their craziness.