Gunman (guess who) Kills 1 in Attack in Denmark

GostHacked · February 16, 2015

Mostly for the same reasons children lie, ie. to get attention.

Kind of like the whole war on terror and the reasons the US went into Iraq in 2003. But it's not just the media that lies.

GostHacked · February 16, 2015

Is jbg purposely spreading lies that have already been debunked? As shown above, even foxnews has retracted and apologized for the lies they made. Why is jbg still repeating misinformation?

He is free to post lies, and we are free to show him where he is wrong.

marcus · February 16, 2015

http://truthuncensored.net/there-are-muslim-no-go-zones-in-the-usa/

A person putting up a sign or holding a flyer doesn't change that no religious law trumps the national law in Canada, United States or England.

Just because this kid is holding up a sign, it doesn't make it true:

Edited February 16, 2015 by marcus

Michael Hardner · February 16, 2015

And of course the source is some fringe site.

February 16, 2015

A person putting up a sign or holding a flyer doesn't change that no religious law trumps the national law in Canada, United States or England.

Just because this kid is holding up a sign, it doesn't make it true:

It doesn't make it true. It just means that that is what they believe.

WWWTT · February 16, 2015

But I will defend your right to say it.

Why do so many people have to throw this comment in?

When did having the freedom of speech equate to what you have to say must be important and we all have to stop what we're doing and pay attention?

And really, honestly, how far are you really willing to defend it? And who's really trying to take it away?

Say for example you go to the park with your spouse/partner, and this guy looks at you and says "man your wife is something really ugly and you have a super fat ass!"

Will somewhere in your response to him (if you choose to respond) include "I defend your right to freedom of speech"?

Ya I'm guessing good chance it's a solid no!

As we see so often, it is far more easier to discredit what people have to say opposed to taking away their freedom of speech.

Conspiracy theorists wearing tin foil hats is a good one.

Some people here on this site aren't taking their meds.

The wakos on this site are out in full force today.

These are a few good examples that we have all seen on this site.

Is the government defending your freedom of speech?

How about the Canadian troops? (just think about that one next time Canadian soldiers are fighting for your freedoms)

Is a lawyer going to stand in court for you for free?

But you're willing to?

WWWTT

WWWTT · February 16, 2015

It doesn't make it true. It just means that that is what they believe.

No actually it means that that's what they want to say.

The kid holding the sign is still a minor and may not really believe what he was told to do or more than likely doesn't know the difference.

WWWTT

WWWTT · February 16, 2015

And of course the source is some fringe site.

You are attempting to discredit what they have to say.

In other words, you don't like the fact that they have freedom of speech

WWWTT

Moonlight Graham · February 17, 2015

We are making a mistake by focusing on bringing justice to individual wrongdoers. The problem is "no go" zones in European cities and the spread of hate by imams. We must target such mosques in both the West and the Muslim world. What they are preaching is incitement and war.

I won't disagree, but Canada has been cracking down on "radical" imams/mosques. I have little doubt that virtually every mosque in the country has been infiltrated by government at one or another for them to ascertain what kind of messages are being preached in them.

I think online radicalization is far more dangerous and effective, given that young men are very often the ones getting radicalized.

As Justin Trudeau rightly said, we also need to understand the root causes of why these young men are turning to violent muslim extremism. I believe it's religion mixed with a struggle between nationalisms. Some young muslim men feel a much stronger connection to Islam/muslims as a group than they do to Canada/Canadians as a group, and when they see Canada and other Western countries attack muslim countries, desecrate the holy land of Mohammed (ie: Saudi Arabia), and kill innocent muslims, they (understandably) get very angry. This makes them turn to extremist interpretations of Islam, which contain religious loopholes that justify them (and inspire them) to act violently against enemies of Islam. I'm sure if the US were invading/bombing Canada I'd feel pretty angry and violent myself towards the US.

jbg · February 17, 2015

I won't disagree, but Canada has been cracking down on "radical" imams/mosques. I have little doubt that virtually every mosque in the country has been infiltrated by government at one or another for them to ascertain what kind of messages are being preached in them.

I think online radicalization is far more dangerous and effective, given that young men are very often the ones getting radicalized.

Then infiltrate, as well, the fringe websites.

As Justin Trudeau rightly said, we also need to understand the root causes of why these young men are turning to violent muslim extremism. I believe it's religion mixed with a struggle between nationalisms. Some young muslim men feel a much stronger connection to Islam/muslims as a group than they do to Canada/Canadians as a group, and when they see Canada and other Western countries attack muslim countries, desecrate the holy land of Mohammed (ie: Saudi Arabia), and kill innocent muslims, they (understandably) get very angry. This makes them turn to extremist interpretations of Islam, which contain religious loopholes that justify them (and inspire them) to act violently against enemies of Islam.

Trudeau could well serve Canada by acting as a psychologist for these victims. What better way to serve his country by taming their demons and turning them in to productive citizens?

I'm sure if the US were invading/bombing Canada I'd feel pretty angry and violent myself towards the US.

You guys beat us in the War of 1812 or at least got a tie that amounted to a victory. Not what our teachers teach but what I beleive.

Big Guy · February 17, 2015

I think the process is very simple - ISIL decapitates or burns or slaughters a few guys on Video. The armchair soldiers in the West get all riled up and blame Islam and all Muslims (just follow the threads on this site). The young, disenfranchised Muslim men in the West, get a lot pi$$ed and decide to go to the Middle East to join ISIL.

So there are more ISIL soldiers and more decapitations or burns or slaughters on video and the armchair soldiers .....

Hey, if it works then why stop?

Bonam · February 17, 2015

Hey, if it works then why stop?

Yes, why stop decapitating and burning people? After all, gruesome killing is such a fun way to pass the time with your buddies.

February 17, 2015

I think the process is very simple - ISIL decapitates or burns or slaughters a few guys on Video. The armchair soldiers in the West get all riled up and blame Islam and all Muslims (just follow the threads on this site). The young, disenfranchised Muslim men in the West, get a lot pi$$ed and decide to go to the Middle East to join ISIL.

So there are more ISIL soldiers and more decapitations or burns or slaughters on video and the armchair soldiers .....

Hey, if it works then why stop?

A request: Could you cite the threads where those on this site blame all Muslims for the ISIS acts of barbarism?

Thank you.

Edit> I want to make it clear I'm not arguing they don't exist. I probably only see about 25% of the posts on the issue. I just want to know who it is. Or, they are.

Edited February 17, 2015 by bcsapper

Big Guy · February 17, 2015

To Bonam - I assume that you get the gist of my post. In case you did not, this group is fighting a war - a holy war to them. What they are doing is working to that end and we keep falling for it.

As to warfare, is it any more outrageous to decapitate people than to drop bombs on them and incinerate or obliterate them?

February 17, 2015

I would assume that if we decapitated the occupants of Guantanamo, (and any relatives that were visiting at the time, just because) you would be somewhat more horrified by that than you are by the air strikes.

But that's just an assumption, and I could be wrong.

Bonam · February 17, 2015

To Bonam - I assume that you get the gist of my post. In case you did not, this group is fighting a war - a holy war to them. What they are doing is working to that end and we keep falling for it.

Yes, but I think dismissing ISIS crimes with a resigned "well it works for them, so they'll keep doing it", infantilizes the people responsible. They are adults, and responsible for their actions. They should be held to the same standards as anyone else. If bombing civilians "worked for" the US, would/do you dismiss it by saying "well it works for them"? No, you wouldn't, you'd condemn it. So why give ISIS a pass?

As for is the Western bombing campaign morally equivalent... if the West bombed them out of nowhere cause they hated them for no reason, it would be essentially just as bad. But Western powers started bombing them after ISIS started committing a genocide of the Yazidi people... so that changes things a bit, don't you think?

Edited February 17, 2015 by Bonam

Big Guy · February 17, 2015

I am outraged and horrified by any innocent deaths. Be it one, one hundred or one thousand or ... Be it by ISIS burning people in cages or Israelis incinerating people in apartment buildings in Gaza. Non combatants should not be dying.

Those inmates of Guantanamo who killed civilians should not be there - they should have been executed. The problem is that there are a few folks there who did nothing. They are there because others, while being tortured, pointed at them as guilty of something. That is why the USA has no idea of how to deal with them.

To bcscrapper - What outrages you more; A combatant burned in a cage, a bunch of people beheaded on video, a bunch of civilians roasted in their apartment, a wedding party mistaken for an enemy being disintegrated by our jets?

To Bonam - War is a crime. I dismiss nothing that anybody does in a war, atrocities done in retaliation, atrocities done as a defensive invasion or atrocities done in the name of freedom. The first step in defeating an enemy is not to vilify them but to understand them. There is a difference between good guys, bad guys and smart guys and dumb guys. These ISIS guys are smart bad guys and have been playing the American led coalition like a fine fiddle.

Never have so few done so much damage to so many with so little.

A few years ago, we had a Middle East in balance. We had Iran and Iraq fighting a war every few years, losing millions of soldiers but keeping each other from wandering too far away from home. In Afghanistan, there were religious zealots (Taliban) who were in control, had wiped out the heroin trade and kept the populace in peace. In Iraq, Hussein was killing a few of his own people intermittently to maintain his dictatorship. In Libya, we had Gaddafi sitting on his oil $billions but getting slapped down any time he tried to wander too far away from home. In Yemen we had a fragmented government funded by Saudi Arabia keeping their own special interests as a priority.

Then came those "Weapons of Mass Destruction" fable that the Americans used as an excuse to take Hussein out and that invasion of Afghanistan to try to get those Saudis who did 9/11 and Bin Laden (who was in Pakistan).

Today, Iraq is under siege with hundreds of thousands killed since the Americans got involved. Iran is stronger that it has ever been and will soon have the bomb. Afghanistan is a failed state with the Taliban in negotiation with the current puppet government and ready to come back into control. Libya is another failed state (we helped bomb them too) with ISIS filling the void. Yemen has no government with the religious radicals currently in control.

Syria is the only county which we have been unable to screw up. Assad was almost defeated but with ISIS keeping the American coalition busy has been able to maintain power. He is patiently waiting for the coalition of the stupid to weaken ISIS so Assad can fill that void.

The West has stuck its nose into the Middle East and created voids which were ripe to be filled. They have now been filled - by an organization that is thumbing its nose at the West with like minded people streaming into the area to join the anti-American army.

As to moral equivalents - there are none in war. War is immoral.

GostHacked · February 17, 2015

Moonlight Graham · February 17, 2015

You guys beat us in the War of 1812 or at least got a tie that amounted to a victory. Not what our teachers teach but what I beleive.

On 9/11, did you and/or many Americans feel angry that you had been attacked and innocent people were murdered? Did you and/or a lot of Americans want to go bomb the people who attacked you?

There isn't a whole lot of difference between an angry young man joining the US military after 9/11 to protect his "homeland" from outside attack and an angry young man joining an Islamic jihadist group to protect his "homeland" from outside attack.

eyeball · February 18, 2015

I think online radicalization is far more dangerous and effective, given that young men are very often the ones getting radicalized.

No kidding, and it's probably the often vicious and vindictive comments from people who cheer and applaud the west's policies in the ME that radicalizes them the most.

jbg · February 18, 2015

On 9/11, did you and/or many Americans feel angry that you had been attacked and innocent people were murdered? Did you and/or a lot of Americans want to go bomb the people who attacked you?

There isn't a whole lot of difference between an angry young man joining the US military after 9/11 to protect his "homeland" from outside attack and an angry young man joining an Islamic jihadist group to protect his "homeland" from outside attack.

I'll still advocate and fight for my side. They and I disagree about my very existence. I don't care what they think.

bush_cheney2004 · February 18, 2015

No kidding, and it's probably the often vicious and vindictive comments from people who cheer and applaud the west's policies in the ME that radicalizes them the most.

Yea...and those cartoons...just can't stand those cartoons. Let it be a jihad to remember.

Bonam · February 18, 2015

To Bonam - War is a crime. I dismiss nothing that anybody does in a war, atrocities done in retaliation, atrocities done as a defensive invasion or atrocities done in the name of freedom.

In some cases, war must be fought to avert even greater bloodshed. In some cases, a better outcome can be reached by peaceful means, through negotiation, sanctions, or otherwise. But not always. Violence is rarely the answer, but not never. Therefore, I disagree with your "war is a crime" generalization. In some cases, there can be no other logical or, if you like, "moral" course. To fail to fight back when an enemy bent on the destruction of your people invades would be a crime.

The first step in defeating an enemy is not to vilify them but to understand them. There is a difference between good guys, bad guys and smart guys and dumb guys. These ISIS guys are smart bad guys and have been playing the American led coalition like a fine fiddle.

I wouldn't so much call ISIS smart as the Western response dumb. The Western involvement in the middle-east has been painfully dumb for decades, not much news there.

A few years ago, we had a Middle East in balance. We had Iran and Iraq fighting a war every few years, losing millions of soldiers but keeping each other from wandering too far away from home. In Afghanistan, there were religious zealots (Taliban) who were in control, had wiped out the heroin trade and kept the populace in peace. In Iraq, Hussein was killing a few of his own people intermittently to maintain his dictatorship.

Do you approve of this situation, then? Many casualties in the Iran-Iraq war were civilians, and child soldiers. In Afghanistan under the Taliban, women knew only the "peace" of terror and subjugation. I do not suggest that trying to change these things through military action is a smart move... but you seem to hearken back to this "balance" as somehow desirable.

Big Guy · February 18, 2015

I submit that a country evolves and matures through different kinds of governing structures. Democracy is a very sophisticated kind of social organization where an individual gives up a certain amount of personal power and decision making to others - often others with whom they do not agree. Democracies also require that the population is educated - educated as to all the other kinds of governing structures - from dictatorships to monarchies to communes etc and WHY THEY DID NOT WORK.

There are 5 million children dying every year in Africa. I do not approve of that.

I greatly disapprove of Western democracies plundering the rest of the world and calling it "liberation".

As to the results of our attempt to "Westernize" the rest of the world, are the citizens of Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Yemen ... better off now than they were before the great American expedition? I do not think so. Ask the relatives of those hundreds of thousands that have been killed and the multimillions who have lost their homes and livelihood.

"Balance" was the result of the evolution of the countries and people of that area. "Chaos" is a result of Western involvement which created imbalances, voids and social structure disintegration.

Balance at the cost of human life is bad, chaos at the cost of many more human lives and disruption of multi-millions is worse.

Thank you for asking.

Argus · February 18, 2015

There isn't a whole lot of difference between an angry young man joining the US military after 9/11 to protect his "homeland" from outside attack and an angry young man joining an Islamic jihadist group to protect his "homeland" from outside attack.

Most of the angry young men come from countries which have never been attacked or threatened by the US or the West. Most of the 9/11 bombers were Saudis, a wealthy country where the only American soldiers to have appeared were invited by the government, in order to protect them from a neighbor.

And none of them longed to breath the fresh air of freedom. The only problem they had with their government was it was far too liberal.