Slashdot Mirror
Explosions and Multiple Shootings In Paris, Possible Hostages (cnn.com)
An anonymous reader writes: Multiple sources are reporting that at least 18 people are dead across three shootings in central Paris. The Associated Press reports as many as 26, as of this writing. Some victims were at a restaurant, while others were at a nearby theater. Early reports indicate there may be a hostage situation with more people at that theater. Police have also confirmed an explosion at a bar near Stade de France stadium, where a football match was underway between France and Germany. There are reports of other explosions heard at the stadium as well, but no details yet. "The attack comes as France has heightened security measures ahead of a major global climate conference that starts in two weeks, out of fear of violent protests and potential terrorist attacks." The attacks occurred not far from where the Charlie Hebdo shooting happened in January. "French news media reported that Kalashnikov rifles had been involved in the shootings — a favored weapon of militants who have attacked targets in France — and that many rounds had been fired."
Or... mass deaths in non-warzones are seen as more newsworthy than mass deaths in say... Syria.
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
They want a caliphate across the ME, Africa and into Europe and beyond.
And this is supposed to help the immigrant cause how?
"-1 Troll" is the apparently the same as "-1 I disagree with you."
Why are they attacking France? What do they hope to achieve?
Caliphate. Sharia.
They say as much. Hard to hear them when you listen exclusively to Blame America First crap, though.
A few more of these and it'll finally get through. So no worries; you'll get it at some point.
Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
Incite the white french to attack muslims, thereby making french muslims open to radicalisation which is what the idiots in the M.E. want.
Of course, whites will target muslims to get the muslims angry so that they attack, starting a race war too.
Both sides have the arseholes that want a war, because they think they are "right" and the other "wrong" and therefore they will INEVITABLY win the conflict.
When they can't, they then drag in other groups as "instigators" and "aiding and abetting" the terrorists of the other side, because, like I said, they KNOW they are in the right, therefore if they aren't winning, SOMEONE must be preventing it.
France participated in Operation Desert Storm aka "Operation_Daguet", which is probably reason enough for any jihadist. More recently with the large influx of North African Muslims there's been conflict with France's largely atheistic culture. See the Charlie Hebdo incident -- militant Islam lacks anything resembling either a sense of humor or respect for human rights.
To the point, militant Islam really, really wants to be in charge, which makes pretty much everyone in the world either an immediate target or a future target. It's odd that you don't seem to recognize that.
Unlike other religions, in Islam the act of KILLING is considered as honorable!
That is why throughout the world moslems are killing people - from Nigeria to Syria, to Kenya, to Paris, to WTC of NYC, to China, to Indonesia ... everywhere the you find moslem they kill
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
It is the moslems who are doing the fucking killings !!
Can you liberals please wake the FUCK up?
I've enough of the stupidity of you liberals ! The shooters are yelling "Allahu Akhbar" and you goddamn liberals are blaming the French !!
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
As the person who wrote it, I can guarantee there was not a shred of levity in it. Where I come from, "keep your head down" is synonymous with "stay safe" -- something I fervently hope any hostages are able to do. Since some people are apparently able to misinterpret that, I changed it.
I don't know if you're a troll or not, but you are going out of your way to pick a fight on the internet and projecting some serious ill intentions on somebody you don't know.
Yeah, that will surely endear the refugees to Europeans who already think that too many are coming. That's sure going to swing the mood here.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Terrorism isn't an effective tool to achieve goals.
What? It's right out of the Big Muslim Playbook. That's exactly how Islam spread across large parts of the world once upon a time - through sheer, terroristic violence. You know that neighbor of Frances' ... Spain? Yeah, once upon a time Islamic terrorists overran that next door neighbor and set up shop there for quite a while. Islam doesn't take over and become the ruling force in a country by offering nice health plans and a school for everyone. It happens at the point of the sword, and always has. They lost their mojo a long time ago, and have been culturally butt-hurt about it ever since. That seething anger is all about getting it back.
Unfortunately for them, they're now up against modernity. Fortunately for them, they're up against politically correct pussies in most cases, which means they can take advantage of things like massive movements of immigrants over-running Europe to place thousands of hardcore fighters right where they want them, complete with free housing and food while they gear up. It was never that easy the last time they rolled in - I'm sure they're laughing their asses off, this time. It's so much easier when the culture you want to crush holds the door open for you.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
In the New Testament killing is never portrayed as honorable
On the other hand in the koran killings are portrayed as an honorable service to 'allah', as long as the one getting slaughtered are the infidels
I am a Christian and I do read my Bible, and unlike you, I do read the koran as well to see the big contrast among the two
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
I have to agree. The downfall of some liberal countries is that they become *too* sensitive, and when confronted with a true enemy, they don't realize or recognize it.
When someone is out to destroy you, you cannot simply be polite and act like it's a dinner party where someone had bad manners.
I've heard quite a bit about that actually. Sad and tragic accidents to be sure. But not exactly the same as people willfully murdering civilians en masse in the streets of a major European capital city.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Ah, anonymous coward, we meet again. Those migrants are in safe camps in Turkey, but they choose to risk life and limb in order to move to a rich country (their own words). Saw a bunch of them in my hometown yesterday, angrily protesting because the rooms in their emergency housing don't have tvs. And they don't like the local cheese and butter.
The Parisien victims did not choose to risk life and limb when they went to a restaurant, or to Bataclan to see a hardrock band. 100 hostages, 40 dead, and counting. But I guess you think they deserve it.. because they're white, right? You sound like a fucking campus totalitarian. Why don't you log in and at least show us your nick, you despicable coward.
Why are they attacking France? What do they hope to achieve?
Terror
That's why they call them "terrorists", Kent,
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
You forgot to supply the productive part.
Fine.
Beirut Embassy Bombings - Got the US soldiers from the UNF out of Lebanon.
El Salvador guerrillas - they got significant power in the government. The current president of the country was a guerrilla commander
Maoist fighters in Nepal - King was stripped of political rights, and the maoists got power in government.
You could have easily looked these up, don't be lazy.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
I have family in Paris; what has happened (and appears to be ongoing) is indeed an outrage.
Just as what is going on in Syria (and Ukraine) is an outrage.
There is a reason why desperate people risk their lives, and those of their children, and are drowning in their hundreds.
It's because what is happening in their "major cities" in many, many times worse than what's happening in Paris.
Except for your house, pretty much the entire country is a gun free-free zone. You can own a gun and keep it at home, but you can only carry it to and from your Army training, courses by government-authorized firearms organizations, gun shows (which are also highly regulated), or to sell it.
You can't have your gun at a movie theater just in case James Holmes or a Jihadist appears.
So, to not believe in your fairy tale I have to join the douchebag crowd? I can't simply not be part of either group of loonies?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I understand why terrorists attacked the WTC, because America was a major power in the middle east (both militarily and culturally, and the terrorists hate both). Furthermore OBL hoped to increase his reputation by pushing around the US military.
Why are they attacking France? What do they hope to achieve?
OK, reality check: France is pounding ISIS in Syria right now. Yes, they (we) also pounded Lybia. Terrorists consider France an ally of the USA (which it is).
These guys are simply using terrorism everywhere, because that's the only thing they know how to do.
The right to offend is far more important than the right not to be offended. (Rowan Atkinson)
It's never that simple. NEVER.
How much more complicated are militant Islamists than they come right out and SAY they are? Your desperate search for nuance in a movement that's entirely about (and making headway in) re-establishing a sprawling retrograde, medieval theocratic thugocracy is the perspective that's lacking historical relevance. Wake up. It IS that simple. "Let's go kill a bunch of young French people to show how much we hate exactly what those young be do, are, and want the world to be." Done. That simple. And that will provoke the necessary response, which the extremists will cite as proof that their cause is just, and, and they'll ramp it up even more.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
Islam initially spread because it was very liberal (in the original meaning of the word). It is also why there were huge advances in science and culture. Eventually like most systems with riches it became corrupt and collapsed.
I wonder if all of the people who were killed at the birth and initial expansion of Islam would consider their deaths to have been appropriately "liberal."
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
How many "preppers" are there in the U.S. that believe the West is going to collapse into ruin any day now. All it will take is just the right spark to start the race/culture/religious/civil war.
There's a big difference between preparing for the possibility (you don't seriously believe there will never again be war in North America, do you?), versus believing you can bring it about yourself. Preppers recognize the reality that stable, peaceful societies never last forever and often devolve quickly without enough advance notice to avoid the fray. Terrorists believe they can cause that devolution.
I am a geek attorney, but not your geek attorney unless you've already retained me. This is not legal advice.
To the point, militant Islam really, really wants to be in charge, which makes pretty much everyone in the world either an immediate target or a future target. It's odd that you don't seem to recognize that.
Militant Islam isn't a single entity, it's an ideology followed by many competing groups. The attacks happened because someone, or some group thought it would further there goals. They thought it would be a better use of resources than attacking the US, or Hungary, or keeping fighters in Syria (and they might be correct, or they might not be correct, but they thought it would be a good idea). So the real question is, who are these people making decisions, and why did they make those decisions? It's odd that you don't seem to recognize that.
That's like asking why the Nazis chose to invade Poland when they did, looking for some deep meaning or hidden complexity. They wanted to control it - along with everywhere else in the world. It was an easy target, so they hit it. When the goal is total subjugation of all targets, the rationale for which targets are selected first is sort of irrelevant.
I am a geek attorney, but not your geek attorney unless you've already retained me. This is not legal advice.
People forget that Syria was once a French colony. The Syrians have not forgotten that.
Bzzzt! You are wrong.
Syria was mainly a Turkish territory up until the end of WWI, when it became a protectorate of the French III Republic, along with Lebanon. It became independent in 1946.
Most Syrians actually do not resent the French that much. These acts of terrorism have nothing to do with that period of the history of Syria, but more with the war between the Syrian government and Islamic State.
The right to offend is far more important than the right not to be offended. (Rowan Atkinson)
I would hesitate to call islam "evil" and thereby brand every muslim as an evil person as well. I have muslims amongst my friends and colleagues, and even the more devout ones are guys like you and me, who just want to get along and get on with their lives, and who are just as appalled at these attacks. The less devout ones will happily share a good scotch or go out for beers after work. Not real muslims? If they call themselves that, they are (even it it means a mighty struggle against their more hardline brethren).
That does not mean that there are some pretty bad things in the qur'an itself (just like the bible, I might add). We should be careful to call every individual muslim to task for the literal text in the qur'an without knowing what their stance is, but we should also not shy away from criticizing the bad things coming out of islam or islamic cultures: genital mutilation, violence against homosexuals, nonbelievers, and apostates, or oppression of women, to name a few. Sadly in Europe the debate is pretty black and white it seems: it's either "muslims are bad", or "you're an imperialist intolerant lowlife for criticizing minority cultures". There is a middle ground, and it's not a compromise, but it is recognition of the fact that not all muslims are alike. Don't condemn the group, condemn the atrocities, the actual violation of human rights, and those who do the violating.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
France has really stringent gun control laws. That did not prevented Charlie Hebdo. That also did not prevented 11/13/2015 events in Paris.
What's your point? Do you want to go over the number of mass shootings in the US that also were not prevented by armed citizens?
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
Do you really think france will just abandon their tradition of a very liberal atheist society because of a few terror attacks? "Welp guys, it was a good run for the last few hundred years, but now its time to give sharia a try. Can't afford any more dead bodies!".
No. the only objective of terrorists is to bring terror. They do this so that they can divide the populace, and push un-radicalized muslims over the edge to make more terrorists. They want the non muslims to hate the muslims MORE by these actions (if it even was islamists, we dont know at this point). So your really just playing into the hands of the terrorists by spouting your islamophobias, and joining them on the hate train.
The correct solution is to treat this as a crime, like any other and punish those responsible. Don't go trampling on the rights of ALL muslims / citizens because of a few extremists. That is the objective of terrorist acts!!
But that's how the french would/should deal with it. Americans would deal with it by over-reacting, invading countries, and creating more terrorists in the middle east. See how well that worked for you guys? No worries, you'll get it at some point. You cant fight terrorism with more violence. It's a never ending cycle, and thats exactly what the islamists want!!!! perpetual instability.
As a potential lottery winner, I totally support tax cuts for the wealthy
Pick a country and kill people in the name of Islam
Cause hate against non millitant/radical Muslims in that country.
Non militant/radical Muslims become militant and radical from the new hate.
?????
Profit!
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
Those terrorists do not represent all Muslims in the world. Just as Breivik does not represent all Christians in the world. You asked me to show you where Muslims condemned ISIS actions and I did; or didn't you read the linked article. There are also many Muslims fighting ISIS right now.
Sorry if the facts don't coincide with your world view.
I am very disappointed that this is currently modded +5, Insightful. While I very much agree that we - as a modern, liberal (in the true European sense of the word - not the American caricature of a rich elitist sipping Chardonnay from the backseat of a limousine) society are confronting a medieval, barbaric, religious-whacko movement that wants to apply religious law (as does Ben Carson, etc., BTW) to everyone in the world, just where in the hell do you get the idea that NOT just declaring all of muslims as evil who should be exterminated becomes "Blame America First"? What kind of disjointed, fucked-up thinking can lead from one to the other? Let me guess - you watch Fox News almost exclusively and keep talk radio tuned in all the time. Try expanding your thought process to be able to hold 2 separate thoughts in your head at the same time. Trust me, it can be truly liberating to think independently.
Fortunately for them, they're up against politically correct pussies in most cases
It's the gun toting macho pussies that I'm more worried about. The ones who react to stuff like this by arming themselves, increasing "security" (i.e. reducing freedom and privacy) and generally being afraid of anyone with dark skin and the wrong religion. Those guys are the real threat to our democracies and way of life.
The last thing we want to do now is militarize Paris. I was disgusted to hear a British MP on the TV tonight using these attacks as justification for the Snooper's Charter spying laws he wants to introduce. I'm not afraid, I will walk down the street without clutching my sword, and I don't need weak minded idiots who buy into all this "over-running Europe" crap protecting me thanks.
Yep. I am having deja vu to 9/11. When here on slashdot, several commentators accurately predicted the largest fallout would be restricting our own freedoms.
Fuck that shit! I will take a stastically insignificant attack by deperate nobodies who are doing pointless insignificant attacks because they know they have already LOST, over losing our freedom.
I think that you'll find that the majority of Muslim scholars will be happy to point out why Islam forbids what they're doing.
Like most religious books, you can use them to excuse any kind of behavior. That's why religion must be stamped out. It doesn't matter if it's Islam or Catholicism or Moronism (it's not the angel Mormoni...) it's got to go.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Couple of other things you didn't mention:
1. Muslims are simply going to force the "natives" to become the minority via population control.
With Open Gates: The forced collective suicide of European nations
2. The silent majority ARE the problem.
3. Major US News Station are also part of the problem, such as Faux News. i.e. CNNi put together an award winning one-hour documentary on the use of internet technologies and social media by democracy activists in Bahrain and then refused to show it on CNNi. (CNNi "officially" give the excuse it was only "commissioned for CNN US")
You are confusing terrorism with armies. Those who overran spain back in , what, the 8th century were armies, just like went sent whole armies in their land to conquer it (remember the crusade? By your own definition it was pure christian terrorism - especially knowing how they massacred the locals christian, jew and muslim alike on their way there).
Citation needed : terrorism having vainquished a modern country and a horde of terrorist having the power. Muslim terrorist have no chance whatsoever to conquer a country like France. The best they could achieve is trying to frighten people, but even back decades ago when tehy were setting bombs in the RATP people were not afraid. We were just mightily pissed off that all trashcans were welded shuts.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
Here's the deal. Islamic terrorism is not a "fringe movement" or a group of "isolated loners". This makes it different from the Charleston church shooting kid, the Colorado movie theater kid, the unabomber, and even the Oklahoma City bombing. It's an international movement and is the express goal of many nations, Muslim sects and people around the world. Search Twitter for 'allahu ackbar' to see all the people around the world celebrating this attack. A person who reflexively rejects any attempt to understand or protect against a worldwide message of hate and violence has his head in the sand.
Until Paris conforms to Sharia? You must be dreaming dear...
The Moslem population is anywhere from 5% to 8% to the total French population. Not gonna happen anytime soon.
How many percent in Mosul support Daesh? How many of the Germans were truly Nazis and had a bone to pick with the Jews? The problem with militant fundamentalists is that they're willing to chop the head off anyone who sticks their neck out. And they're willing to sacrifice others to achieve their ultimate goals. If militant Islamists can cause enough terror to provoke counter-attacks by anti-immigration extremists you have 5-8% of the population caught between a rock and a hard place. When enough bad blood is spilled it doesn't matter, after WWII people hated all Germans even the ones who never took any part in the war and never wanted to. Strength in numbers is nice in a democracy, but when you're talking more or less an occupation cruelty, willingness to die and organized effort against individuals that want to be left alone means a small minority can set the agenda.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Yep I am sure they are all pointing their army issue guns at each other to dissuade muggings. Or perhaps it is a remarkably state controlled system. Fascist or Communist by your judgement of how things actually work. After all the guns are registered. The population is tracked. Even down to ensuring that they get enough shooting time at the range.
Without necessarily disagreeing with anything in your post whatsoever, can we please get a little discrimination of ideas and of people? You blurred these lines, and they really need to be un-blurred.
A Muslim police officer was killed while responding to the Charlie Hebdo shootings and a second Muslim helped hide Jews when those same jihadis went on another rampage in the following days. It's important not to forget that. It's also important to not forget that Muhammad killed people right and left, only pausing now and then to rape a nine year old or talk about the importance of kissing a magic rock embedded in Borg cube.
It's an evil and stupid book. People who have completely disagreed with me have gone on to do wonderful things, build wonderful things, advance the cause of physical sciences and history tremendously, etc. etc. disclaimers etc.... can I stop now? Is it ok to simply criticize people and ideas from the seventh fucking century now?
Don't condemn the group, condemn the atrocities, the actual violation of human rights, and those who do the violating.
You're forgetting to condemn the millions of people amongst who the live, and who allow them to continue to operate, be funded, preach hate and recruit. The militant jihadis could never operate without the tacit approval of many millions of their less violent but none the less supportive co-religionists.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
Running out of legitimate target?
Has Jesus Christ now become the latest target of your liberal SJW attack?
Well no.
You said Christianity was better because it didn't portray killing as honourable.
DogDude pointed out that there's lots of killing in the bible.
You moved the goalposts and said the New Testament didn't killing as honourable.
Opportunist pointed out that Jesus never invalidated the Old Testament, so DogDude's point is still valid.
You then responded with a bizarre claim that he was criticizing Jesus and an even more bizarre side rant about a "liberal SJW".
I stole this Sig
Yes. As has anyone who ever watched a boat sail over the horizon.
sustainable living
I've had several problems with Muslims, even the less devout Muslims. My first encounter with Muslims was when we were at the age of 16-17. We went on our mopeds to a football game to play against a team that consisted of only Moroccans. After the game we wanted to got back to our mopeds to drive home, but we were waited by the opposing team. They claimed we were racist because one of them got a bruise on his shin. Well that happens when you play football (soccer for the Americans) and refuse to wear shin protection. At first they weren't allowed to play the game, there are rules against not wearing shin protection in football, but a few angry words later, the referee just stopped protesting to safe his face.
Well, one of them got a bruise and that was because we were racist. Before we could say anything we were beaten by 15-20 Moroccans and they managed to steal the keys of the mopes of some of us and drove away with them. That was my first encounter with Muslims.
My second encounter was when I was 18 years old. I went to my first party organized by a students organization of our college with a couple of friends. We had tickets and the venue was sold out. We went to the entrance but were halted by a few Moroccans who showed their knife and demanded our entrance ticket, our wallet and our cell phones. When I told him I didn't have a cell phone nor wallet (I put my money in my pocket), he hit me with his knife in my stomach. They ran away with a few tickets and some money and entered the party. My friends managed to warn the first aid who drove me to the nearest hospital (that was luckily for me only 2 km's away). It still have a thick scare on my belly, that often bleeds when I go for a run (20 years later now).
And than another encounter was with a colleague who seemed a nice person and with who I started to become friends. But this all changed when the 9/11 thing happened. I thought loud out how people could do such a thing in name of an entity that doesn't even exists. After this loud out thinking, he turned in to a mad man. He started shouting at me in some Turkish language and kept on shouting and even pushing me. A few hours later I had to go to the big boss to hear I was suspended and was fired a few days later for being racist.
Of course not all Muslims are bad. But I only knew one and I had 3 bad encounters with Muslims in my life. These were not 3 out of 1000, or 3 out of 100, but 3 out of 3. In one I almost lost my life, because I was slowly bleeding to dead if it weren't for the red cross who has to assist big parties. In another I lost my only means of transport when I was 17 and I had to ask mum or dad to bring me to sports school or regular school. In the last encounter I lost my job.
I simply can't help it anymore. I have some sort of trauma. It's like those people who don't trust dogs anymore because they have been bitten by a dog. I don't trust Muslims anymore, because I've been stolen from, almost killed and fired because of a Muslim.
I also hate the no go zone for non Muslims, only 6 km's from where I live (this was a housing project for the Muslims established 5 years ago, for Muslims only of course because it was to give people who don't want a loan because it is against their religion a house). Especially for me this is a problem, because I'm pale white, blond hair, blue/grey eyes, fairly large (1.92 m). From the moment I pass this neighborhood I get called names, sometimes they throw cans or carton boxes at me, or in other words, it's not fun to come in a place so close to home where you are hated.
I didn't watch television today, I was reading a book, when I heard people in a cars using their horns to express their joy. I looked out of the window and saw a bunch of multicultural enriching young people, but I didn't know why they did this. Maybe Turkey won their barrage football game, so I looked on the internet and noticed that Turkey didn't have to play a barrage game, but I noticed that there were at least 18 deaths in Paris at that time.
These
Nothing personal, but it bugs me to see this particular urban legend repeated. Tampering with your disconnector will just make your gun jam. It may fire two or three rounds before it jams. If you want the thrill, and the prison sentence, just leave the disconnector out. No need to ruin the part.
To convert to full auto for real (don't do this unless your find yourself in the middle of a zombie apocalypse, or some other situation that you fear more than you fear spending 10 years in prison):
First, obtain a full auto fire control group. Readily available over the counter. If the rest of your kit is mil-spec, you just need the auto-sear, it's axis and spring. You may need different parts if not mil-spec: hammer, trigger, disconnector, selector and bolt carrier. You may also need to mill out your fire control pocket, or get a different receiver.
Second, obtain the means of locating the axis hole and drilling it square. Jigs are, again, readily available over the counter. So are blueprints, drill presses and CNC machines.
Third, and this is the part that lands you in prison, drill the axis hole. Drill undersize and finish with a reamer if you want it to be nice, but roll pins can tolerate a little slop. Congratulations, you have now illegally manufactured a machine gun. (There are ways for this step to be legal, which don't apply to you.)
Fourth, assemble your machine gun and use it wisely.
Fifth, destroy it when you are done, if you haven't been caught yet. If your receiver is aluminum, use a hydraulic press to fracture the casting into at least three pieces, or melt it in a smelter. If steel, cut in three parts with a torch or some other method that leaves a jagged irregular kerf. Bandsaw won't work now that the ATF considers a receiver to be intact if it could be welded back together.
Consult a lawyer before performing steps 1 and 2. As far as I know, no one who stopped after #2 has ever been charged, but some people speculate that it could show intent.
Regarding American carry, I'll say that they went 0 for 2 at the Draw Muhammed event in Texas. Last night in Paris, 4 attackers apparently killed 100 people, one by one. In many public places in America, 2 or 3 of those 100 would have been armed. Not much can be done about the opening salvo, but armed men don't normally wait for their turn to die while those around them get picked off one at a time. The body count might have been much lower, and the worst case is none higher.
See that "Preview" button?
The militant jihadis could never operate without the tacit approval of many millions of their less violent but none the less supportive co-religionists.
Why couldn't they operate?
I think that IRA terrorists, Basque terrorists, ETA terrorists, Red Hand Brigade terrorists, heck even Timothy McVeigh managed to operate quite well without needing the tacit approval of millions. I'm not sure why militant jihadis would be any different?
Terrorism is a statistically completely irrelevant cause of death. 2014 was the most peaceful year in human history. Recently, only 0.9% of all deaths are violence related and there are indications this is on the decline. Life Expectancy is rising, Child Mortality is dropping and life seems to be moving on. Apart from Cancer, Heart, Lungs and stuff like Malaria, traffic is a big one we should be worried about, really. Having a staircase in one's house is, for instance, more dangerous than the notion of terrorism ever will be.
Now, here come the news outlets. Apart from all this "Educating and Informing The People", "Freedom of Speecht" and "Checks and Balances" bullshit, the press and media generally exist to make money. In some cases they even seem to exist for more Machiavellian purposes, but to make money is a biggie. So when something as statistically insignificant as a terror attack happens *Close By*, the news explodes. It's like a gigantic circle jerk in which everyone and their uncle needs to fill yards and yards of column space or air time to talk about What May Have Happened, Why It May Have Happened or What May Happen Next and Which Refugees To Treat Like Shit Because Of This.
So generally speaking, the Media seem to take events like this and add to the sense of fear that terrorists would have instilled in the citizenry. As such, I'm beginning to view the media as culpable in the problem of terrorism, because any wacko can get a world wide platform by misbehaving in an instant. Social media are even worse when it comes to knee jerk bullshit and mass panic.
Which leads me to Slashdot. I think Slashdot is a haven of alternative news which offers refreshing takes on things, interesting articles, sometimes brilliant and inspired discussions. It is a news aggregator / outlet that works differently, feels differently and makes me feel at home in more than a few ways.
I am sad to see that even here, there needs to be a discussion on Paris. I came here to avoid that news. Moreover, I came here to avoid certain discussions about Guns, Islam, The Administration and Refugees. Because these discussions are boringly predictable, polarised, fraught with no-fact-debates and generally just plain stupid.
You're forgetting to condemn the millions of people amongst who the live, and who allow them to continue to operate, be funded, preach hate and recruit. The militant jihadis could never operate without the tacit approval of many millions of their less violent but none the less supportive co-religionists.
That was Osama bin Laden's argument for justifying his attack on the World Trade Center. He felt that the hundreds of millions of Americans who allowed the CIA and Israelis to operate, fund, preach hate and recruit against Lebanon and the Arab world were giving their tacit approval to the killing of muslims.
When's the last time you've condemned Western human rights violations against muslims and Arabs?
Like the more than 150,000 Iraqis killed during Bush's invasion?
"Good" religious people are nevertheless the breeding ground for evil terrorists.
Where is the fatwa that declares all terrorism un-islamic and cleares up that terrorists won't go to get 72 virgins and in fact they'll go to the deepest pits of hell (or whatever the islam equivalent, I'm not an expert)?
The Iranian Prime Minister was among the first to speak out clearly against these attacks, and I respect him for it. But all this jabbering about how these fuckers who are through-and-through religious nutjobs have nothing to do with the very religion that they themselves use to justify their actions is just pathetic.
Of course there is a link. Stop denying it. We can discuss the nature of the link, that there are various interpretations of the holy texts and only some of them lead to violence and so on. But I'm not even taking anyone seriously anymore who categorically denies that there is a link between this terrorism and islam. Of course there is.
What too many people don't get is basic logic. That for terrorism islam by itself isn't enough, there are other preconditions. Social inequality seems to be one of them. Cultural influences, and so on. But even if the religion is not the only reason, it is one of the reasons.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
After 9-11 I saw young Moroccans celebrating in the streets. I also saw muslims of Indonesian, Turkish, Surinamese origin and older Moroccans scolding them. Young Moroccans are exceptionally troublesome here, compared to other groups. The reason is youthful bashfulness in an unfortunate mix with certain cultural aspects, upbringing, and socio-economic issues. Religion certainly plays a role, and hardline muslims (operating from mosques sponsored by S.A.) are all too happy to recruit from these younsters, but it is not the sole cause of the problems. For these kids, religion provides an identity and serves as an excuse for their actions. To them, it's more gang culture than a belief system.
The problem right now is that one half of the country expresses extreme tolerance towards muslims, giving them a free pass on many things that would land anyone else in hot water with the law. The other half has given up and turned their backs on all muslims. That's not going to work if we are to continue to live together. What we should do is to treat muslims like everyone else. Exactly like everyone else. If someone gets fired from a public-interface job because they refuse to shake women's hands, it's their own damn fault, not intolerance towards their beliefs. Your former boss should have seen that incident for what it was instead of tiptoeing around religious sensitivities. If Moroccan kids make trouble, don't go easy on them "to avoid issues with the community" as happens so often; these kids already know they can get away with murder, sometimes to the desperation of their parents. And if we want to call the nastier aspects of islam into question, we should be able to do so openly without being called recist or worse. From now on, let's ignore the "race / religion card" if they play it, and treat them fairly for the rest.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...