Jump to content

Toronto woman charged with assault in the name of ISIS


Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Boges said:

Not saying that.

All I'm saying is that when Whitey does some act of mass violence he's a lone wolf with mental health issues. 

The way this woman conducted herself, I suspect mental health is more at play than anything. 

 

Islam is a religion. Not a race. Not a skin colour.

You could join today...no waiting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Bob Macadoo said:

.....unlike the hateful "freedom of speech" fanatic in Portland OR?

 

There are always individual nut jobs. I'm perfectly willing to accept that someone is an individual nut job. However, the kinds of violence often perpetrated in the name of Islam seems to attract more than the occasional nut job. We seem to see 'crazy' Muslims doing this crap every other day. And we also see groups of them getting together to perform heartless, inhumane, brutal attacks. Since I find it unlikely two or three or more 'nut jobs' would get together to do something that makes it clear that we can't simply dismiss Muslim violence as being due to psychiatric issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Peter F said:

Well, if what she did was entirely rational, what's that say about all the Muslims that didn't do what she did?

Do you think the three in London were doing something rational? Do you think that, by coincidence, three people with identical psychiatric problems met up and formed a group?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Boges said:

Not saying that.

All I'm saying is that when Whitey does some act of mass violence he's a lone wolf with mental health issues. 

The way this woman conducted herself, I suspect mental health is more at play than anything. 

But when whitey does some act of mass violence he invariably IS a lone wolf with mental health issues. And it's rare. We see these Muslim 'believers' doing this sort of stuff all the time, and not always alone either. Witness the three in London, the four who hit London's subways, the dozen who hit the World Trade Center, or the husband and wife in Oakland. And let's not forget the unlamented "Toronto 18", or those two guys who wanted to blow up a train between Ontario and New York.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Argus said:

Do you think the three in London were doing something rational? Do you think that, by coincidence, three people with identical psychiatric problems met up and formed a group?

Good point. So terrorists are entirely sane. They have rational reasons for doing what they do. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Peter F said:

Good point. So terrorists are entirely sane. They have rational reasons for doing what they do. 

Rational by their view. If you actually believe the BS in the Koran, or at least, the popular interpretation that fighting for Islam gets you into heaven and loads you down with virgins, then what they did makes perfect sense. Plus the Arab world is filled with ridiculous conspiracy theories about how Muslims everywhere are under attack by the evil West, and that the only reason the Arab world isn't supreme and wealthy is because the West has stolen all its money and oppresses it. Most don't believe the World Trade Center attackers were Arabs, or even Muslims.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Peter F said:

Well, if what she did was entirely rational, what's that say about all the Muslims that didn't do what she did?

They may have different beliefs about Islam, or don't have the guts to do it, or they like Canada/Canadians more than she does, or they aren't as angry about western foreign policy etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Boges said:

Just because she says she's from ISIS doesn't mean she really is. It's not like being part of ISIS has extensive vetting. Anyone can be part of ISIS, in theory. 

I don't think she said she was from ISIS, but she was a supporter, and dressed the part too.  That makes her a terrorist, given her actions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

They may have different beliefs about Islam, or don't have the guts to do it, or they like Canada/Canadians more than she does, or they aren't as angry about western foreign policy etc.

 

Can you imagine if we were so swayed by another nation's foreign policy? Enough to stab people in the street, that is.

Me neither.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Boges said:

To be fair, that's what we do when a WASP does an act of mass violence. We don't associate it to their religion of choice or politics. . . usually. 

If a WASP committed an act of mass violence and yelled "THIS IS FOR JESUS!" while doing it, and there were well-known Jesus-believing sects of Christianity that committed mass murder based on things Jesus said in the Bible and this WASP was a supporter of that sect, then yes we should associate it with their religion (or their specific sect, to be more accurate).

Edited by Moonlight Graham
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DogOnPorch said:

Can you imagine if we were so swayed by another nation's foreign policy? Enough to stab people in the street, that is.

Me neither.

So if ie: China invaded Canada and militarily occupied Canada for decades, dropped countless bombs on Canadians, supported thug Canadian leaders and orchestrated coups in Parliament, had Chinese soldiers patrolling the streets in Canadian cities and shooting Canadians (possibly even family/friends) who rebelled at the Chinese in order to ensure the groups/parties/leaders China wanted to rule for their own interests stayed in power...you're saying if ie: China did all that and then you moved to China for whatever reason, you wouldn't be tempted to attack the Chinese government?

Now, stabbing innocent people is another story...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

So if ie: China invaded Canada and militarily occupied Canada for decades, dropped countless bombs on Canadians, supported thug Canadian leaders and orchestrated coups in Parliament, had Chinese soldiers patrolling the streets in Canadian cities and shooting Canadians (possibly even family/friends) who rebelled at the Chinese in order to ensure the groups/parties/leaders China wanted to rule for their own interests stayed in power...you're saying if ie: China did all that and then you moved to China for whatever reason, you wouldn't be tempted to attack the Chinese government?

Now, stabbing innocent people is another story...

 

Where has the West done this to get Islam's goat-up...so to speak?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Peter F said:

Good point. So terrorists are entirely sane. They have rational reasons for doing what they do. 

They have rationalized it for themselves, yes.  Just as any Christian would rationalize that by avoiding sin they'll go to heaven.  This may not be entirely logical, but most of these people certainly don't have psychiatric problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No specifics...okay.

Let's say it's due to Iraq. What brought the West to Iraq? Was there Islamic terrorism before Iraq? 

Folks wish to separate events like the Siege of Vienna or the Mahdist War...say...with so called modern times.

When did Islam declare peace? Any date come to mind?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Moonlight Graham said:

So if ie: China invaded Canada and militarily occupied Canada for decades, dropped countless bombs on Canadians, supported thug Canadian leaders and orchestrated coups in Parliament, had Chinese soldiers patrolling the streets in Canadian cities and shooting Canadians (possibly even family/friends) who rebelled at the Chinese in order to ensure the groups/parties/leaders China wanted to rule for their own interests stayed in power...you're saying if ie: China did all that and then you moved to China for whatever reason, you wouldn't be tempted to attack the Chinese government?

Now, stabbing innocent people is another story...

Did Britain occupy and bomb Pakistan and Morocco?

This meme of 'supporting thug leaders' is drivel. We deal with governments out there. What else are we supposed to do? Shun all human rights abusing nations? That's 80% of the ones out there. I don't see Africans (unless they're Muslim) stabbing and bombing people in the West. I don't see Indians doing it, nor South or Central Americans. It's only Muslims. And yet you people persist in attributing it to revenge for our foreign policy as if Islam had nothing to do with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DogOnPorch said:

I would like you to be specific, please.

Ok let's go one by one:

Quote

So if ie: China invaded Canada and militarily occupied Canada for decades,

Britain and France militarily occupied much of the middle-east after WWI following collapse of the Ottoman empire. Then you have all the nonsense with Britain, the US, Canada,  etc. involved in and/or supporting Israel within Israel/Palestine for the last 100 years (which Arabs don't like, but that's another debate entirely). 1991 Persian Gulf War, Afghanistan War 2001-now, Iraq since 2003 (yes, Canada is fighting there as we speak), plus Syria as well as Libya since 2011-ish.

Quote

dropped countless bombs on Canadians,

As a part of the above wars, plus drone strikes in numerous ME countries for over a decade now.

Quote

supported thug Canadian leaders and orchestrated coups in Parliament,

British/US-CIA coup in Iran in 1953, the West trying to get rid of Assad (in the name of "human rights" LOL), US supported Saddam in the 80's during Iran-Iraq war...then removed him in 2003, Taliban coup (aka regime change) after 9/11.  We support the House of Saud in Saudi Arabia since the 60's if not beforehand (what about those human rights?), Shah of Iran from 1953-1979, plus however else fits our fancy.

Quote

...Chinese soldiers patrolling the streets in Canadian cities and shooting Canadians (possibly even family/friends) who rebelled at the Chinese in order to ensure the groups/parties/leaders China wanted to rule for their own interests stayed in power

Iraq/Afghanistan wars etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Argus said:

This meme of 'supporting thug leaders' is drivel. We deal with governments out there. What else are we supposed to do? Shun all human rights abusing nations? That's 80% of the ones out there.

I'm not saying whether I support or not our supporting of thug leaders in the ME.  Indeed it's a part of international relations sometimes.  I'm just telling you that it pisses of a lot of Muslims when they can't get rid of their own shitty leaders in part because western nations support them and arm them and have their own military in bases within their countries in part to protect them.

Quote

I don't see Africans (unless they're Muslim) stabbing and bombing people in the West. I don't see Indians doing it, nor South or Central Americans. It's only Muslims. And yet you people persist in attributing it to revenge for our foreign policy as if Islam had nothing to do with it.

I never said Islam, or certain interpretations of it, aren't a part of it.  Yes of course it's a major factor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Moonlight Graham said:

I'm not saying whether I support or not our supporting of thug leaders in the ME.  Indeed it's a part of international relations sometimes.  I'm just telling you that it pisses of a lot of Muslims when they can't get rid of their own shitty leaders in part because western nations support them and arm them and have their own military in bases within their countries in part to protect them.

Right. Like, uh, we supported the Shah of Iran. Thank God they got rid of him and brought in those peaceful, enlightened leaders they have now!

You know who would replace the Saudis if they were overthrown? People who think they're too damned LIBERAL. You need to get it into your head that aside from a very tiny intellectual class there is virtually no appetite in the middle east for anything remotely like a western style government that does not abide by Sharia law. The kind of government almost all people in the middle east would choose now if they had the choice would resemble that of Iran.

The Islamists in ISIS set out exactly why they're fighting us and why they want us to die. It had virtually nothing to do with our actions in the middle east, past or even present. It was almost entirely based on our being a depraved society full of godless whores and sodomites who refused to abide by the explicit will of Allah.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Argus said:

Right. Like, uh, we supported the Shah of Iran. Thank God they got rid of him and brought in those peaceful, enlightened leaders they have now!

Why do you think they overthrew the Shah?  And what do you think helped drive those people to replace him with religious zealots and expunge western influences from their society in what used to be a fairly modern country as far as the ME goes?

Quote

You know who would replace the Saudis if they were overthrown? People who think they're too damned LIBERAL. You need to get it into your head that aside from a very tiny intellectual class there is virtually no appetite in the middle east for anything remotely like a western style government that does not abide by Sharia law. The kind of government almost all people in the middle east would choose now if they had the choice would resemble that of Iran.

Consider that Muslims have become more radicalized and more religiously fundamentalist and less secular while rejecting many Western cultural influences over the last several decades in significant part because 1) they hate us, for reasons I've showed, and 2) the secular regimes that we have propped up, like Saddam and the Shah and Gaddafi, have failed them miserably, and the ME is in tatters in large part because of the West, so these people reach out for "the good old days" of what worked for the Muslim societies in past centuries, which was their religion and a more fundamentalist/traditional Islamic way of life, like Sharia law.

Go read up on how/why the 1979 Iranian Revolution happened if you don't take my word for it.

Quote

The Islamists in ISIS set out exactly why they're fighting us and why they want us to die. It had virtually nothing to do with our actions in the middle east, past or even present. It was almost entirely based on our being a depraved society full of godless whores and sodomites who refused to abide by the explicit will of Allah.

Read in Bin Laden's own words why he declared a jihad against the US and the West ("Crusaders" he calls us): https://www.911memorial.org/sites/default/files/Osama bin Laden's 1998 Fatwa declaring war against the West and Israel.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Boges said:

To be fair, that's what we do when a WASP does an act of mass violence. We don't associate it to their religion of choice or politics. . . usually. 

We probably would if they wanted us to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Why do you think they overthrew the Shah?  And what do you think helped drive those people to replace him with religious zealots and expunge western influences from their society in what used to be a fairly modern country as far as the ME goes?

Much of the revolution against the Shah was driven by the mulahs and imams, who hated him pushing western values and trying to separate Islam's laws from that of the state. You might remember the legions of women in black marching and protesting and chanting against the Shah, because he had spoken out against the requirement that women wear such garments. Yes, he was a brutal dictator. But so is and was everyone else in the middle east. If he'd put on the cloak of Islam and not opposed Islamic laws and beliefs his family would probably still be in charge there much like the Sauds are in Saudi Arabia.

Quote

Consider that Muslims have become more radicalized and more religiously fundamentalist and less secular while rejecting many Western cultural influences over the last several decades in significant part because 1) they hate us, for reasons I've showed,

You haven't 'showed' the reasons, you've given your opinion of the reason. There is a distinction between the two. Why will you not believe the Islamists when they say they hate us for our godless, whorish sodomite ways?

Quote

and 2) the secular regimes that we have propped up, like Saddam and the Shah and Gaddafi, have failed them miserably,

Have they? Who has succeeded? The islamic governments of Sudan and Iran and Saudi Arabia? That might be because they have oil, you know.

Quote

and the ME is in tatters in large part because of the West,

The ME is in tatters for a wide variety of reasons, not the least of which was adopting Soviet style governments with central planning, government ownership and stifling regulations after they were freed by the British and French. Aside from the the Saudis and gulf most ME countries adopted a marxist/socialist style of government. They also disdained, and still disdain education. Well, except for education in Islam.

The absence of a liberal state has been matched by the absence of a liberal economy. After independence, the prevailing orthodoxy was central planning, often Soviet-inspired. Anti-market, anti-trade, pro-subsidy and pro-regulation, Arab governments strangled their economies. The state pulled the levers of economic power—especially where oil was involved. Where the constraints of post-colonial socialism were lifted, capitalism of the crony, rent-seeking kind took hold, as it did in the later years of Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak. Privatisation was for pals of the government. Virtually no markets were free, barely any world-class companies developed, and clever Arabs who wanted to excel in business or scholarship had to go to America or Europe to do so.

http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21606284-civilisation-used-lead-world-ruinsand-only-locals-can-rebuild-it

 

Quote

Read in Bin Laden's own words why he declared a jihad against the US and the West ("Crusaders" he calls us)

Yes, and why? Because the Saudis dared to allow infidels to come to their country to free Kuwait from the Iraqis. Remember this was written in 1988. All the stuff since then hadn't even happened then. Bin laden was outraged that infidels were allowed onto the sacred holy soil that only Muslims are supposed to trod. And he hated Jews, of course.

 

Edited by Argus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Argus said:

You haven't 'showed' the reasons, you've given your opinion of the reason. There is a distinction between the two. Why will you not believe the Islamists when they say they hate us for our godless, whorish sodomite ways?

That is certainly part of the reason, like I said religion plays a large role.  What I'm saying is that radical interpretations of Islam combined with western military intervention in the ME has been what has led Muslim terrorists to attack us.  That's nothing controversial or even my opinion, any terrorism expert will say the same and have written scores of books and academic journals saying the same.  I agree with you that the kind of Islam they practice is terrible garbage and should be gutted from this country. I'm not blaming this on all the West, but our interventions are a huge factor in their rage, like Bin Laden wrote..

Edited by Moonlight Graham
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,713
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    nyralucas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...