Slashdot Mirror
Terror Attack On Norwegian Government
techtech sends this quote from the BBC:
"A large bomb blast has hit near government headquarters in the Norwegian capital Oslo, killing at least one person. The offices of Norwegian Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg were damaged extensively — a government spokeswoman said he was safe. Police said a number of people were injured in the city center explosion. No-one has said they were behind the attack, which witnesses said could be heard across the capital."
It's funny how nowadays topical information (news for nerds) comes to Slashdot days after other internet news channels, while off-topic posts like this hit the front page only a couple of hours after the event.
Ninjas, pirates, cowboys, cyborgs, and vikings are /.'s top demographic categories.
This is not the result. This is part 1. Part 2 depends on the action of the government and people. You see, in all cases of what terrorism has done itself was to kill a few people. This only affected a reasonable tiny segment of the population. More are affected by drunks on the road every year.
The important part of terrorism is the part 2 - the so called reaction by the people and the government. They could either,
1. treat this as a criminal act and hold the responsible parties to account, or
2. undermine their own freedoms in their own fear of the "enemy", stop trusting one another and view anyone that appears different as the "enemy". This is the aim of the terrorist, not the initial damage.
So far, the terrorist are quite a ways ahead, if you ask me. A simple bomb here, a bomb there. A handful of people die. People demand action. And soon enough they look suspicious at any minority, become radicals themselves and destroy their own societies simply out of fear. The victims becomes the terrorists themselves. And the cycle continues until we end up with Afghanistan style society.
Because it is much more reliable to get up-to-date news sources of the event from Norwegian nerds keeping up with international nerd zeitgeist than it is from America's idiot news media.
Glad I could help.
if anywhere.
Then again, terrorism does affect nerds. I know many love to ignore it, but it is crap like this which ends up getting the laws passed that we do discuss and do not like.
So, I can see a connection. If we don't closely examine one of the source causes how are we ever to stop the erosion of our rights? What is it going to take to bring these people in a modern society where they coexist with others on equal terms, or at least on terms which don't make people look over their shoulder every time they pass or have fear of cars parked where the should not be?
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
This is news for everyone.
Nerds are just a subset.
I stole this Sig
This should never have happened in a saner world.
LUKE 19:27
"But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them - bring them here and kill them in front of me."
I was wondering the same thing. Yet more proof slashdot has fallen. This in no way belongs on slashdot.
Someday we're going to have to wipe out the muslims. That's what they are trying to do to us it seems....
You cant fight a war by saying 'i support your diverse religon and respect it even tho you're trying to kill us all'.
The attack was on a government office, so it's still too early to say whether it was an act of terrorism or war.
Al Qaeda and the organizations allied to it in "the Resistance" are the most obvious suspects, being that they are at war with everyone else in the world and they have the talent and desire to do it.
The attack could be in response to the recent filing of charges against Mullah Krekar, leader of Ansar al-Islam which was one of the first groups to rename itself to "al-Qaeda in Iraq" after the US invaded.
The motivation could also be the Jyllands-Posten cartoons that were published in a Denmark newspaper. The Muslim Brotherhood and Hizbut Tahrir encouraged attacks on Norwegian embassies after the Norwegian tabloid Dagbladet republished the cartoons.
Norway has been active in the bombing of Libya. The attack may have come in retaliation from the Libyan government, which has pledged to strike back at its attackers any way it could, or it may have come from unaffiliated right-wing Muslims who see the attack on Libya as kaffir invading the ummah.
It could be someone else. Remember that the Oklahoma City bombing was a couple of white ultra-Christians. Everyone thought it was Hezbollah at first. The attack could have come from Jews who are pissed off about European spy agencies funding the the NIF, B'tselem, Peace Now, Human Rights Watch, and all the lies they tell about Israel. It could have been a nut from an opposing political party or a farmer with a grievance about a change in subsidies and the knowledge to make a fertilizer bomb. The only thing we truly know is that we don't know yet, so wait a day or two for the investigators to do their jobs.
Here's Reuters's speculation.
Captcha: compute. If anyone was complaining that this was not news for nerds, it is now.
Large (some estimate 100kg of explosives) bombs against the headquarters of western governments far removed from any local conflict are rather rare. This is the equivalent of someone blowing up the White House or Downing Street in the UK. It might not reach quite up to the UK subway bombing or the Madrid train bombing but this was way more than one man with a suicide vest.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
The terrorist are winning because nobody holds them accountable for their actions. There are reasons people think terrorist acts are their only defense against wrongs, either real or imagined but these acts only ensure increasing amounts of attacks in the future up to the point of all out warfare. I still have a problem with how any rational or somewhat intelligent individuals could witness the behavior of groups such as the Taliban and ignore it because that might mean that terrorism and sadism really exists that can't be blamed on the US. Terrorism works because the international political environment relies solely upon the principle of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" when deciding how to handle the problems. Its past the time for the US and others to remove all of their troops from the middle east and other trouble spots and let them sort their own problems out and kill each other in peace. But also issue a warning saying any support of an extraterritorial terrorist attack originating from within these areas, whether it be financial, moral, or man-power will guarantee the immediate destruction of a randomly selected city or geographical location without the slightest regard for damage or casualties. No boots on the ground or dropping warning leaflets just boom.
Its past the time for the US and others to remove all of their troops from the middle east and other trouble spots and let them sort their own problems out and kill each other in peace.
Hey! That's is exactly what we did in Afghanistan. How did that work out?
There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
While granted terror attacks in Norway are probably pretty rare
Actually, nothing like this has happened in Norway since WWII, and AFAIK no known terror attacks whatsoever has been perpetrated on Norwegian soil in modern times. That might be the reason it's made the news worldwide, I'm still not sure why this is on Slashdot.
On a side note I work at the University of Oslo, I heard the blast clearly from my office (believed it was thunder at the time). An hour prior to the explosion I suggested to colleagues leaving early and having a beer at this pub, now I'm happy they declined... While I'm very conscious that this shall not influence my everyday life in any way in the future, it *is* a strong reminder that even our peaceful country is vulnerable.
Are you a grammar Nazi? I'm trying to improve my English; please correct my errors!
Its past the time for the US and others to remove all of their troops from the middle east and other trouble spots and let them sort their own problems
That would work fine if the radical elements of Islam were content to stay where they're at. But the various radical Islamist movements in the last few decades have shown a great deal of ambition at taking over and radicalizing more and more countries (not just in the middle east, but asia and africa as well). Those ambitions were bound to clash with the west eventually.
The problem with the west is that we really don't know how to fight global wars anymore and aren't really comfortable facing certain kinds of problems. WWII was a long time ago, and we just don't seem to have the stones anymore to take on a large scale threat. We're also too politically-correct to acknowledge some hard realities about the nature of this conflict. No one wants to be the guy to admit that radical Islamists aren't just some tiny minority movement. In large swaths of the Muslim world, they are a dominant force (and a real threat). The modern west really likes to respect religion, and we have made that our dominant model (for the most part) for a some time now. The thought of anything resembling a holy war makes the western world VERY uncomfortable. Unfortunately, a large portion of the Muslim world doesn't share that tolerant attitude.
Not saying that had anything to do with this particular attack. For all we know, this attack could have come from some local Norwegian political terrorists. And I'm hesitant to jump to any conclusions until more information is known.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
1. Are you saying that the Koran does not command the killing of "infidels"? That it is merely passages taken out of context?
Well, duh. I'm not a Muslim, and I know that much. The Koran has a lot of passages about fighting wars with enemies of Islam, who were a combination of pagans, Christians and Jews. However, it also has passages about treating Christians and Jews fairly and allowing them practice their religions, and passages stating that they can achieve salvation (or whatever the Islamic equivalent, not sure here). And more generally, it has passages about not picking fights with people who don't pick fights with you.
So, well, the straightforward conclusion here is that the Koran says a lot of different things about the relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims, and that the context in which each of those things is said needs to be weighed to see which of them best match any given situation. As, well, every single damn book ever written to guide human behavior.
PS: Muslims do not generally consider Christians and Jews to be "infidels." Rather, they consider them to be people who believe in the same god as Muslims, received the same teachings that Mohammed did, but then lost or distorted them. You will of course find plenty of counterexamples to this rule—"Christian = infidel" is an Islamist terrorist theme—but it's by no means a majority opinion. So I'm not interested in responses that document Muslims who have labeled Christians as "infidels"—I know they exist, and I know it's a minority opinion.
PPS: The fact the the Koran periodically has nice things to say about non-Muslims doesn't mean that all Muslims in general will have a good opinion of Christians and Jews; I'm not interested in responses that document cases of Muslims saying bad things about non-Muslims, mistreating them or showing prejudices toward them. In fact, the Koran's nicer statements about non-Muslims often seem like attempts to correct early Muslims' pre-existing prejudices and ill will against them. Take, for example, the Koran's statement that the food of the Peoples of the Book (Christians and Jews) is OK for Muslims to eat. Why would such a rule need to be stated? Well, some early Muslims must have seen some forms of physical contact with Christians as taboo. Similar comments apply where it says that you should not fight or kill non-Muslims who haven't tried to do the same to you: "Don't kill Christians and Jews" must have been a teaching that needed to be taught in Mohammed's time as much as in ours. Religion exists in a harsh, often brutal world of people who adopt it more as a tribal identity than as a moral guide.
Are you adequate?