Slashdot Mirror
Islamic State Claims Responsibility for Paris Attacks; Death Toll At 127
The L.A. Times reports that Islamic State, the group variously known as ISIL, ISIS, and Daesh, has claimed responsibility for the multi-pronged terror attack yesterday in Paris which left at least 128 people dead, most of them from among the audience of a rock concert at the Bataclan theater, in the heart of the city. Details of how Friday’s assaults were carried out remained hazy. It was still unclear, for example, whether the restaurants and concert theater were attacked by two separate teams of militants or one group that went from one place to another. ...
Attackers opened fire on the crowd with automatic weapons, shouting “God is great!” or blaming France for airstrikes on Islamic State in Syria, according to some reports. Dozens of concert-goers were killed before French forces stormed the theater.
Many Parisians posted appeals and photos on social media asking for news of friends or loved ones whom they had not heard from since the attacks. One man said on Twitter that a government hotline set up to inquire about missing persons was so overloaded that calls could not get through.
In the wake of the attacks and with an overloaded public infrastructure, Facebook activated its post-disaster check-in tool for Parisians to notify loved ones that they are safe. According to Reuters, French President Francois Hollande has vowed to undertake a "mercliess" response to the attacks.
Yours,
Duke
It's awful what hate and fanaticism drive people to do.
Similar to the upcoming US election results
... are running Europe.
Of course they would claim it. Even if they didnt do it.
They did warn the world they had ISIS operatives mixed in with refugees. So its not truely surprising.
Meanwhile, few have noticed that France has sweeping surveillance laws, while other countries like Italy and Spain do not.
The latter have arrested terrorist cells even this month, while the former could not, even during an high alert state due to international talks the day before.
Can we say we have proof those laws do not work? Or will we go all emperor-palpatine-during-emergency after this?
Each act of terrorism breeds hatred from the victims, which leads to the mistreatment of those considered like the aggressors, which leads to the formation of circumstances likely to breed terrorists.
So yes, it appears these hateful acts are quite likely to continue.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
Who still thinks is a good idea to allow mass immigration of refuges from the region? Lets face it ISIS is going international they way its progenitor was. We simply can not allow people from that region to enter without being fully vetted and as we have no way to do that for the vast majority of the refugees. I think they need to be kept right where they are.
If anything we should simply help Turkey, Jordon, and Lebanon secure their borders. The safe thing to do is assume anyone crossing the boarder is a threat.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Things like this would not happen. I mean if we ban guns we will not have gun violence. If we ban poverty, we can get rid of poverty. If we would ban murder, we could get away from things like this happening. One thing is for certain though is that this is the fault of evil old white balding male republicans, who are to blame for everything untoward that happens in the world. If only evil white male rebuplicans had not prevented France from enacting their anti murder laws like they wanted to do a few years ago, no one would have died in this Paris catastrophe. But for the greed of old white men, who wanted to continue to profit off of murder, would all be living harmoniously together and driving around in bentlys.
"Your friend Mary Lawrence has checked in as safe. Good news, Safe Lock & Co. is having a sale on wall safes. Click this advertising link for details".
All religions have reality acceptance issues. Much if not most of the "beliefs" can be shown to be incorrect with simple repeatable experiment and facts. While it is fine to have pre-conceived notions about what is unknown at this time, having beliefs based on faith, with no basis in reality, yet being dead certain of them inevitably causes a large part of these types of incidents. Many studies show that religion actually makes people less altruistic/moral.
It's pretty obvious the world would be far better off without religion.
I heard it was al Qaida.
An al Qaida spokesman stated that they were responsible and that ISIS couldn't find their ass with both hands.
Have gnu, will travel.
Law enforcement in France has been gradually weakened over years, possibly decades already. Police officers are reluctant or have orders not to enter certain banlieus (suburbs). To finish off terrorism, this will have to change first. You have to nip things in the bud.
Article from 2011:
http://www.fdesouche.com/335448-on-donne-lordre-a-la-police-de-ne-pas-rentrer-dans-les-cites-car-on-na-peur-que-les-banlieues-partent-en-feu-rmc#
Absolutely yes. Go after terrorists.. Kill or imprison them to the last man....especially ones that support groups like ISIS and Al Qaeda. Also pressure must be applied to any Islamic countries that continue to oppress other religions because they are effectively the one's indirectly generating these fanatics.(here's looking at you Saudi Arabia)
0However...
care has to be taken not to lump in every Muslim into the same pot (see Indonesia which respects its minorities far better than Israel). Nor to treat the problem of religious extremism as limited to Muslims. Their are plenty of local religious crazies too. (see christian fundamentalist morons in the Republican party that want to bizarrely and dangerously teach school children the earth is 6000 years old and are just as liberal in their advocacy of force as any jihadist)
and start calling them islamic sodomites, or something that might offend their world views.
There were strong warnings in advance of the 9/11 attack, which the Bush/Cheney administration chose to ignore. (Could it be because they needed a "Pearl Harbor" event to catalyze the "New American Century" vision from PNAC?)
They then ignored the reality that Iraq had NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11, and lied their way to get us into Iraq (in accordance with the "New American Century")
It didn't work, because the full might of the country couldn't actually be used (being based on a lie, and not having full support)
This broke Iraq, and gave rise to ISIS, killing or displacing millions along the way.
My heart goes out to the victims in Paris, and the millions of others our nation has displaced, maimed, or killed in the service of our empire.
It benefits their cause to claim responsibility for terrorist actions even if they did not do them.
Shooting into a rock concert with an AK-47 is not random?
....of what a horrible tragedy this is, but I fear another round of loss of liberty and rights is in the making for western countries.
Which is sad really.
Nobody sees that the terrorists are winning, when a handful of sand hicks can bring the Western Nations to their knees terrified of Allah....which is EXACTLY what they want.
Canada chickened out and all it took is 2 tragic deaths before setting up the foundations and laws for their future police state.
USA did it way back in '01
But wtv....seems just like so hopeless...It's almost as if Western Civ wants to die, willingly, and revert back to the days of fiefdoms, theocracies and barbarism.
Poke America, and America will slap you. Poke France, and America will make your culture bend over and American military will live in your country for decades if not a century.
What are the motives of these terrorist groups?
Strike fear in the heart of infidels?
Help erode the freedoms that citizens in most Western countries enjoy? (especially those freedoms that enable lifestyles hated so much by Islamic State supporters).
Revenge for whatever wrongs they think were done to them? (regardless of justified or not).
As a show of force? Letting everybody know they're still here, and capable of carrying out coordinated attacks abroad.
Just to name a few - surely there's more. In the end they will not accomplish their goals. First and foremost because Islamic State seems incapable of leaving peace-loving 'neighbours' alone. Action = reaction, a law of nature. If they'd just pick some limited area to call theirs, focus on primarily peaceful (r)evolution, and leave their neighbours in peace, they might have a chance at getting just that. But if they want to conquer the world through violence, and stop at nothing in the process... well then: nope, not gonna happen.
Second, because declared enemies of Islamic State aren't going to give up their lifestyles, countries, democracies etc NO MATTER WHAT. As a typical Westerner, personally I could care less what they do in Syria, Irak or neighbouring countries. But any Islamic State fighter is welcome to try and pry my freedoms from my dead fingers in a fight on my turf. Likewise, when their actions cause millions of refugees to "invade" our countries, how could they possibly expect us to not care? Again: action = reaction.
Lastly, because no matter how many crazies are out there, they are vastly outnumbered by regular / reasonable / peace-loving people. And quite a few of those have guns too. And planes. And bombs. And an intelligence apparatus. It's like a car picking a fight with a freight train... yes it'll be ugly, but the outcome is certain: a car cannot possibly win that fight.
What does killing people randomly accomplish?
In the context of these Paris attacks, you may want to re-think in how far victims were chosen "randomly". Not to suggest in any way that victims were known or specially selected. But hey if you start shooting on a busy Paris street, you're pretty likely to hit French people, right?
Reading this thread and the last, I am struck by how the Left is not just defending Islamism, but fiercely defending it. I have seen America blamed (of course that's the first choice), all religions blamed equally (because Christians explode in public places all the time), and the other usual arguments. All of which stolidly defend the Islamists, This isn't the first time it's happened, either, this is the usual mode of operations. My question is...why?
Why does the Left defend Islamism like this? Why aren't they letting the Islamists defend themselves? They are perfectly capable of it, they don't need any help. And yet every bomb, every terrorist act, the Left is once again front and center fighting for Islam. It's like they are informally allied. What motivates educated people to sit in front of a keyboard for 40 minutes composing a thousand-word defense of the disgusting mass murder Islamists committed in Paris today?
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1510866/Poll-reveals-40pc-of-Muslims-want-sharia-law-in-UK.html
http://www.pewresearch.org/daily-number/stoning-adulterers/
We should stop worrying about civilian casualties, they don't respect our civilians.
Let's face it. Most muslims are not openly terrorists. But one of the reasons the muslim terror cells succeed is that they are harbored by the acceptance and quiet complicity of the muslim ghetto, who shares their long term political goals. Deport them all!
an ill wind that blows no good
it's hopelessness. ISIS is just a bunch of men with no jobs, no wives, no future and no hope for a future. This is what happens when you've got millions of people with nothing to lose. Stop calling it Fanaticism. It misdirects you from the real issue, which is the 1% war profiteering in the Middle East and stealing their oil. We can't solve _anything_ until we start recognizing the real problem and start actually _rebuilding_ Iraq and Afghanistan. If you're American though this probably means giving up your SUV. I'm not trying to troll, you can't have one and have a happy/stable world. There's a lot more to it than that, but our ridiculous thirst for oil is part of it...
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Once upon a time, people were generally less stupid.
If any 'claim of responsibility' emerged hours or days after a terrorist attack it would be treated with the utmost suspicion. Even if transmitted directly to them, news networks would notify the authorities of course, but they might not even report it publicly. Unless a phone call or fax was received at the moment of breaking news, some times even minutes before, the information was deemed to be zero-credible or less than zero, more likely than not the work of a crank. And news sources were generally averse to being cranked.
News sources did not even want to be cranked by governments. They'd never forget to add the words "allegedly" or "believed to be" when repeating a government source who was pretty sure who was behind something. Some acts of terrorism in those days would end up being reported as if they were... simply crimes. The 'who' would not be examined at length until or unless individuals were actually brought forth and charged. Then, their connections to organizations would be explored.
Then the 21st century dawned and people have become generally more stupid.
Now ascribing an organization to an attack is as simple as starting a rumor or sending a tweet. Everyone is on the verge of believing anything, they just need a little push either way. There is no burden of proof, only a preponderance of NOISE. Axe-grinding news sources and governments are already blaming them anyway to take advantage of this lower IQ, so they're already on the ball. Just like Michael Ledeen at AEI was blaming Saddam Hussein for 9/11 on the afternoon of 9/11. (Hint: that was Donald Rumsfeld's favorite website. Can you see a decade of bad road ahead?)
Now a claim by a single so-called 'unnamed source within the government' is cause enough for a press association like AP to drop the 'allegedly' and report the deed as having been done by those people, ready to put in the history books.
If all information should be free, we're sure getting what we paid for.
<blink>down the rabbit hole</blink>
Except that Al-Qaeda and most other terrorist groups have 'no fixed abode' - they are hard to find and kill, look how long it took to get Bin Laden
ISIS claim to be the Islamic state, and have control over cities and towns in Iraq and Syria
Any reason why those places won't be flattened to rubble by the air forces of France, Nato, Russia, the US, Iran, Jordan, Israel etc
We can leave the actual ground combat to the Kurds, Assads forces (Shiites) Iranians etc
In the middle of some news report I was reading, a source noted that it's probably not a case of Supreme ISIS Cobra Commander in his underground bunker in Raqqa giving the order - but a local ISIS "affiliate" basically doing their own thing, with credit going to "ISIS" as if it were a country or something.
Who knows - maybe they were even talking to each other... But the idea that "ISIS" is more like a brand, or a label that some clever marketing folks have convinced angry retards everywhere to sew onto their own specific bag of unrelated gripes is pretty compelling.
Come to think of it, it sounds a lot like what Anonymous do. Clever.
Laugh!
Western governments should offer a $50k bounty per head, dead or alive. It would be cheaper than any war or drone strike, and allow the so called innocent Muslims that live in the same communities as known terrorists to start cleaning up their own problem.
We should probably also have a world wide ban on Sunni Islam. All Sunni's range from annoying, on par with a Southern Baptist, to extremely violent against women and finally to bomb making jihadists. What I'm saying is we draw the line for crazy religion we can tolerate to the level or Southern Baptist or Mahayana Buddhist (with Malaysian branch being the worst). If you are beyond those examples, than your religion gets shut down. Every member gets forcibly relocated into a different part of the world, marriages performed under the religion are annulled as well.
We don't need to kill everyone, but we do need to kill the festering infection.
Which was and remains true about processes, that do not involve drones. You aren't contradicting slasher999 at all.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
We are a _lot_ more militarized than you think, for better for for worse. Also, we've got a long history of not really giving a shit about civil rights when stuff happens. Also, they can't get too uppity or we start killing them in mass. Seriously, we really don't give a shit as long as we're not seeing our soldier's bodies on tv at night (they can die, we just don't want to see it). We're also a pretty well segregated society. Wealth people live in suburbs. Those "foriegn fighters' would stick out light a sore thumb even if they were whitebread Americans. The police would stop them, see the guns and hall them in if they were spotted in a rich part of any town. If they want to shoot up poor people who cares? That's no different than gang violence. Poor people killing poor people barely makes the news here.
These are just a few desperate and mentally ill people with nothing to lose out to do a little damage. They'll keep doing it as long as they have nothing to lose and no access to mental health care. These people don't hate your way of life, they hate theirs...
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
I'm sure France will apologize for being attacked.
Americans introduced the hash tag #PrayForParis. To which a Parisian replied "Friends from the whole world, thank you for #prayforParis, but we don't need more religion! our faith goes to music! kisses! Life! champagne and Joy! #ParisisaboutLife". I found that amusing, despite the fact I read it last night shortly after the attack.
It seems that American tweeps don't know that the French value their secular state. Which must seem odd to people in a country where so many people are still religious.
no, I don't have a sig
We should stop calling them Islamic State ... and start calling them islamic sodomites, or something that might offend their world views.
You would respond to violence by calling them names. They would then laugh, and continue with the violence. It's obvious which is more effective.
If you really want to call them something that might do some good, call them "Brigands". That puts them in a class, in Islamic law, where the appropriate action by other Muslims is neither to support them, nor avoid criticizing them as members of a different-but-possibly-valid branch of Islam, but to apprehend them and put them to death for their crimes. It also fits their actions, so it may be persuasive.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
It is as if they've got a list of parties (nations) to piss off and are going down the list one by one. By this logic China, Japan, or Brazil ought to be next in line.
Besides which, they do seem to be doing their damnedest to drum up popular support for military action against them. Both the US and the UK will point to this attack and say to their respective electorates: "See? Told you that restraint won't help against these extremists. Now will you believe me? We need to actively engage those criminals *now* before they become too large to contain.".
I could understand (but not agree) if they just wanted to have their "caliphate". If you wanted to build a state you'd want to control territory and then secure it.
But going after a Russian airliner? The country ruled by an ex-soviet KGB colonel? The one who has shown he can (and will) use dumb (read: cheap) bombs to raze whole villages simply to get at one target? The one who comes from a long tradition that has demonstrated that as far as they're concerned normal rules of war don't exist? The one party that might otherwise be persuaded to sell arms (as long as they're to uses against US and UK forces)? Well ... if they looked for another adversary they've just got one.
And France? How much of the coalition's bomb runs are carried out by French aircraft? How many of the drones do the operate over Syria and Iraq? Not all that many? Man! We gotta change that! Lets piss 'em off big time and see if they can't do better.
The only reason I can think of is that they hope to goad Paris into dropping a nuke on Raqa ... decapitating ISIS ... and (I suppose) starting WW-III. Could that be it? Could they really aim at igniting a full-scale war between approx. 1 bln. muslims and 4 bln. non-muslims?
Or is thinking not their long suit? Are they too absorbed in their faith for that?
Anybody?
If Europe had American style gun control laws then it'd probably have an American style problem with mass shootings happening every day due to ordinary white citizens going crazy
The U.S. does not have shootings happening every day - and France just surpassed years of U.S. mass shootings of innocents.
The U.S. has more gun deaths per year but almost all of that is gang violence, who aren't buying guns legally anyway so I'm not sure how you plan to stop them...
Over the next few years Europe will have a vastly higher death toll at the hands of guns, precisely because the populace has been disarmed and pacified.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Behind the dumb homicide bombers — full of hate and fanaticism — are the enablers, that provide them with explosives, training, targeting, and other logistics. And behind those are people, who pay for all that.
It is obvious, that France's Le Pen and other European "right" nationalists stand to rise enormously in the wake of this tragedy. It is also a fact, that Vladimir Putin finances these guys. Would he not be happy to see his allies gain ground — while the electorate's attention shifts away from his crimes?
In this case, the answer to the famous question: Cui bono? (who profits?), has an obvious answer.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
I bet most of you weren't even aware.
Immediately after UK citizens were disarmed, murder, rape, and total violent crime DOUBLED. Yes, they were murdered with knives, hammers, etc - twice as many people murdered. Not exactly what I'd call a resounding success.
Did you know that if you ban food, removing all public access to food, far fewer violent crimes will be committed with food as the weapon? Did you also know crime will skyrocket? That's precisely what has happened in the UK. Twice as many murders and rapes, and those (like you) who disarm the victims are now directly responsible because this pattern has been repeated enough times that the deadly results of the actions you advocate are entirely predictable.
Seriously, show me some examples of people who have said "I'm killing people specifically because I don't believe in god!"
It's more like, what's going to keep some sociopath like that in check if you can't instill some kind of external fear in to them. I'd say it's quite possible that being an atheist did indeed contribute to how these people act(ed).
captcha: globally
pulling boots off the ground has nothing to do with public opinion. Americans were pretty much opposed to the 2nd Iraq & Afghan wars. Our leaders ignored us, like they did with the bank bailouts. We accomplished everything we wanted though. In Afghanistan we wanted an oil pipeline and we got it. We also wanted a gov't sympathetic to our cause, and we got it. In Iraq we wanted control of their oil fields and we wanted to funnel money to military contractors under the guise of nation building. We got that too.
You're not following the money. That's where your mistaken. Everything is always about money. Always. Nothing else really matters. You're feeling instead of thinking. Your gut tells you that the ones you can see, the ones yelling 'Great Satan' are the ones that matter. It's the ones you can't see. The ones pulling the strings from behind that matter. I know I'm starting to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but come on, it's hardly a theory when the war profiteers were holding conventions out in the open leading up to the Iraq war. It's hardly theory when any fool could tell you Afghanistan had nothing to do with 9/11.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
... I know it shouldn't surprise me, but even after this, the top rated comments are still slamming generic "religion" and talking about "backlash" playing a role.
What exactly would it take to wake you up? Would anything do it? Your own head being sawed off? Your city being bombed?
Who will end his/her life with a suicide belt or -car?
In those cases here, with participants shouting "Allahu Akbar" - God is great - there must be some benefit in their brain to be doing this.
Maybe it's such a desolate and hopeless situation they live in, that a fantasy escape (hope, projection of rewards into the future) becomes necessary to make this very existence bearable.
Another possibility for reason may be education and intelligence - being able to understand and see motives of manipulators in relation to oneself.
<mischief>
Now, since many, if not all thought models, be they religious or ideological, depend to function and gain popularity on similar mechanisms, fighting them would also fight their own basis for existence.
Which gives rise to the question if societies depending on mechanisms can eliminate identical mechanisms in other societies and what are the consequences?
</mischief>
Los Angeles.
One needs to remind themselves attacks in other countries are usually training exercises for a US or UK based event. The US west coast has been quiet from terriosm since 1990's so it's time to rethink strategy.
Another attack just happens to be Muslims, when he keeps saying that all religions are the same and its just as likely to be Mormons, Amish, or Buddhists.
ISIS is just a bunch of men with no jobs, no wives, no future and no hope for a future.
Where do you get your news? ISIS's economy is a hell of a lot more robust and stable than many nations that have a seat at the UN. ISIS fighters and leaders routinely have wives. Many of the most high profile jihadis (including but not limited to ISIS) have had good career prospects and families or at least romantic interests, including the computer programmer "Jihadi "John" (whom we just killed yesterday) and the Ph. Ds and graduate students who flew into the WTC.
Go watch VICE's report on ISIS (one of the few organizations willing to send people to do some reporting on the ground.) Listen to the guy driving the car talk about how he's leaving his wife and children to go fight for ISIS because, bottom line, Allah means more to him.
the 1% war profiteering in the Middle East and stealing their oil.
The Iraq war was moronic. We gave a bunch of contracts to Haliburton and other American companies. And there were conflicts of interest there, yeah.
But we did not fucking steal anyone's oil. Stop making shit up. Iraq has been getting billions from it for quite a while now. That oil doesn't get shipped to American companies. It gets sold on the international market at regular market price.
We can't solve _anything_ until we start recognizing the real problem and start actually _rebuilding_ Iraq and Afghanistan.
How. Fucking HOW. It's hard enough to try to fathom what we could do to rebuild Iraq that we haven't already tried but... "rebuilding" Afghanistan is a contradiction in terms--there's nothing to rebuild. It's a shithole dominated by highly religious tent dwellers, petty warlords and Pakistani agents and slummers. It's been that way long before 2001.
If you're American though this probably means giving up your SUV.
Your post has now gone into stream-of-consciousness ranting. Yes, we need to achieve energy independence. That has fuck-all to do with rebuilding places that we've already spent hundreds of billions of dollars on trying to rebuild for over a decade.
I'm not trying to troll
lol.
From elsewhere: "Did you know that one of the most common ways for a con artist to gain the confidence of their victim is to say they are the same religion? One of the basic tenets of using charisma is to know what your target wants to hear. There is a dissatisfaction among the people of the middle east, and that dissatisfaction is being leveraged by charismatic opportunists who are able to become what these dissatisfied people want them to be...it doesn't matter if they believe what they are saying or not, what matters is that they are leveraging culture, beliefs, dissatisfaction, poverty, tribalism, or whatever works in order to manipulate them. That IS charisma. There is a portion of every single population on earth who are vulnerable to this sort of opportunist, and the greater that opportunist's charisma, the more followers he will have.
[...] Not to mention the more fucked up, violent and socially and economically unstable a region is, the greater the proportion of the population open to such charisma as a means to find 'solutions' for their grievances. You're seeing that effect play out now almost across the entire world now and it will only get worse as the various crises converge and intensify. I think I've said it before, but political ideologies and raw nationalism/ethnic identification can be very similar to religions in how they play upon and interact with whole populations of people, and the results of such fanaticism are usually about the same, and often intersect and intermingle with each other. All these are forms of anti-reason which appeal to myths, selective and tendentious interpretation of history and emotional and tribal identification end up having something like the same horrific consequences for those caught up in its effects. I don't think I need to present many examples of what should now be self-evident given that human history is a litany of this phenomenon playing out in one grotesque fashion or another. I also think it is too ingrained in human nature for it to be any other way, also. I've come to the conclusion that only works of sublime art and craftsmanship, products of ingenious engineering, scientific discoverers and writings that are the product of of minds of rationalist doubt are about the only products of human civilisation and history of any value and worthy of surviving."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44vzMNG2fZc
He should not have leaked anything about foreign intelligence gathering. This is why.
Thanks, seems like a well-informed article. I'll read it. I wasn't aware of this line of thinking.
Everything here on /. eventually gets blamed on white republicans when things get worked out. I expect you ./ faggots to up vote this post. If you do not you will be reported to Hillary Clintons thought police, and police will be knocking on your door to cure you of your hateful last century thinking.
Hillary will be the power that energizes the nation to new heights of well being and togetherness. Fuck fossil fuel. Let's power the world with our gender inclusiveness and diversity. Rather than intimidating the world with the power of our military, we should support the world with the power of our love. By destroying our weapons, and locking up hateful white people, we can show our enemies that we love them and turn our enemies into our friends. President Putin will be voting for Hilary, and so should you. Let's show the world we can be the big guys on the planet. Rather that supporting the USA first our new generation of politicians will be putting the world before the USA. Hillary will ship all native USAians into the ocean and replace them with guest workers from all over the world. How lovely that will be. No longer will white privilege go unchecked. There will be a tax on all non immigrant, non minorities living in the USA. Yes by 2020, the USA can be composed entirely of minorities. Everyone will live in a gun free, rent controlled housing complex, where there every need and thought is carefully monitored by the good folks in to government to ensure that everyone is happy and free.
I guess now we'll see what the Foreign Legion and the rest of the French military is capable of. France is a nuclear power, after all.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Meanwhile in the 21st century...
Time and again it strikes me how unbalanced media coverage is with regards to reports on fatalities and risks of life in general.
In contemporary Iraq, for example, more than a thousand civilians are killed by acts of terror _every_month_ for quite a while now. The last day with more than a hundred civilian fatalities in Iraq is just two days ago. (Source: https://www.iraqbodycount.org/... )
And other risks of getting killed - like traffic accidents or contracting diseases - remain vastly more probable than falling victim to terrorism in some western city.
And yet, the media coverage plays along both with the terrorists who, of course, appreciate the amplification of their publicity and it works in the hands of those in the west who want to abandon freedom, claiming that such was necessary to "keep us safe".
I would like to ask the media to spend the same amount of air time on every single human who dies from an unnatural cause, maybe people and politicians would then see what the actually relevant risks are and address them rather than fantasizing about "wars on terrorism".
God is hard coded in our DNA. Its as if it was put there purposefully, you do have to admit that all this violence would make a great reality TV show. I'll bet there is a civlization out there sitting on the edge of heir seats wondering what us puny human will do next.
At least in the case of Stalin and possibly mao, atheism card was more actually used against the local religions/churchs as a way to wrestle power from them. others used religion to get their goal and massacred christian or muslim. Others again used other way to get power. But make no mistake in all cases atheism and religion were used as an excuse for those in power seeking more. It may as well be anything else whatsoever.
Now let us look at the mob level. On the level of a mob (which terrorist are more or less) it does not function that way. You will need a reason to whip the people into a fury. That reason may be stupid to other group mind you. Religion (and other groups like politics and mostly racism or similar hate-ism) can whip such a group into a fury. Look at those persons getting killed because for example somebody said they burned a koran, or somebody said they were witch (look at people burned in africa nowadays !) or people were told to have eaten sacred crows. Whip a mob and kill them. There is no way you could whip into such a fury a group solely based on atheist and based on their core belief as atheist. Oh sure you could get a good lynch mob where *some* atheist would also participate for secular reason like lynching a pedophile murderer, but it would still be something which is not related to their atheism.
I defy you. Find us a mob of atheist which lynched somebody. Good luck on that. There is plenty current example of mob from *all* major religions lynching people. Heck ever remember the balkan genocide of muslim by christian ?
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
Someday people will look back on the shared delusion of religion and wonder what the fuck was wrong with everyone.
One problem religion shares with alcoholism and drug addiction is that attempts to stop it usually both fail miserably and cause more harm than letting it run its course without intervention.
One problem it shares with Rabies, Herpes, and HIV is that those afflicted with some forms of it can not be cured. The choice is to leave them alone (and maybe treat the symptoms) or kill them off.
So get used to having religious people around, and figuring out to live in a world containing them.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
I'm surprised I haven't seen any of the usual hate filled demented motherfuckers in these forums posting blame on Israel and the Jews for this. Well, here is a preemptive 'go fuck yoursel'.
I wonder why United States and other major NATO nations does not pool their resources and build a real life Rainbow Six? This is clearly not a isolated incidence and EU need to pull itself together and respond to this threat seriously.
It is extremely worrying that public sentiment may rise and carry the EU into a very large ground war with IS. Certainly the public has every right to be outraged, but the last thing the world, Islam or even IS wants is a larger war.
The purpose of the attacks on Paris is recruitment for IS which is low on people. It is taking a risk recruiting in this way because it knows the West can legitimately scale up; such is the need for fighters. But this form of recruitment will provide IS with 10,000 new recruits who will be spurned on by Western media, the excitement of war, the warped ideals of Islam as cherry picked by recruiters and the audacious bravado of black clad youths calmly murdering.
The media can’t be relied on think and manage its messages carefully enough. I predict in th e coming days “chilling” CCTV images will be widely circulated inadvertently depicting terrorists as fearlessly and competently fulfilling their mission. Too many people will see these images and see them in the light intended by IS.
France has been progressive, thoughtful and careful in its involvement in fighting terror and I sincerely hope Hollande uses the current crisis to scale up French and EU outreach to at-risk young men. The battlefront is really the low income flats which surround Paris (and many Western cities) in which angry, marginalised north African and former French colony citizens and unemployed rage simmer. IS has simply learned to tap this. Know that IS will use up these young adults and children until there are none left.
In the process of building the caliphate, the human toll will be extraordinary. It is not clear how to prevent this in Iraq and Syria but the toll elsewhere is on home turf and can be greatly curtailed by local outreach, which in turn cuts off supply to IS.
-tdg
Have you not read the responses in this thread? The half that aren't condemning the terrorists are blaming America.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
The current policy of the Multicult is invented by the left, born of white self-loathing. It is suicidal. If they don't care about the survival and prosperity of Christendom, I do. These ni66ers need to be sent away from the west one and all.
The western world brought this on themselves. Did you really think that bombing an entire region for an entire century would bring peace?
When all hope is lost, most people will pray before they meet their maker...
Hence the suicidal bombings and virtually all forms of so-called middle-eastern terrorism.
When you're sitting down with your family to have dinner one minute, and a US drone strike kills your entire family the next...Would you not pull something 'extreme' to get pay back?
Wake the fuck up people.
France brought this on themselves.
What they did to France they do to them every single fucking day.
FYI, I'm neither Muslim nor religious, 'I pay the fuck attention' and I warned people in the past that this shit would come back to bite you all in the ass...
Apparently, now is the time to pay the piper.
The west has managed to create a hundred years worth of pissed of people no thanks to endless occupations and war.
Why the fuck do you think they're all running north to Europe?
As the saying goes, if you can't beat'em, join'em...Hence the reason 90% of all immigrants are male.
They are there to breed with European women and to conduct a 'cultural take over'. And your liberal 'politically correct' asshole representatives who started this shit from the beginning are paying them to do it.
that can't be solved by a few Marines and losened rules of engagement. Kill 'em all, and let God sort 'em out!
That is not the point.
No one is saying they did this because they atheists.
The point is that despite their lack of religion, they committed atrocities that are as bad as, and sometimes worse, than those committed in the name of religion.
If you go back to an age where polytheism was widespread, you will still see conquests and genocide. The ancient Egyptians, Greeks and Romans had the habit of equating their own gods with gods from other cultures around them. Despite all this, they still fought bitter wars and conquered territories, ..etc, like what was done in the Middle Ages and what is done now ...
So, religion, or the lack of it, are not the cause of atrocities. It is humans who are the cause of it.
2bits.com, Inc: Drupal, WordPress, and LAMP performance tuning.
These fucking maggots running ISIS...ISIL...Al Quaeda can find plenty of patsies to wear suicide vests and go on suicide missions from the refugee camps or war torn countries. The fuckers who did the Mumbai attacks went to recruiters looking for money in exchange for the missions. In the documentary "Terror in Mumbai", one of the captured terrorists tell how he joined the group and said he would go back and do the same thing for the Indian Government if they too gave him money. It's so eerie listening to the intercepted phone calls directing the terrorists on what to do and who to kill. They're controlled like Zombies.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDROrLtc6GM
Francois Hollande has vowed to undertake a "mercliess" response to the attacks.
It is difficult for a bomb to tell the difference between an Islamic State militant, and the average person living in an Islamic State controlled area. That means the "mercliess" response will probably be a bloodbath for a lot of innocent Syrian people.
I'm not sure what makes this story worthy of a tech site like Slashdot.
the people involved are global. None of the money was pillaged like in the old days. It was transferred to mega corps with well connected people sitting on their board of directors. It was moved and shuffled around to the right sort of people. You're world view is still local, while the people screwing you over are global.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Because when you claim to work for a "higher being" then you still get to claim some of the glory, while shifting the blame to "$deity works in mysterious ways" or "it is $deity's will". People will do a lot of terrible things in the name of a higher power that they might not for mere mortals, even though that where the actual message is coming from.
Look at all the idiots that supported miss "I've been divorced 3 times and cheated but marrying gays is against God's will"
Few news reports here are mentioning the fact that France has been dropping bombs on Syria for many months. Given that information, it could be argued that this action by Syrians is them just fighting back in one of the few ways available. Both countries' behaviour is equally reprehensible :-(
Also, why the hell would you quote someone quoting an 8-year-old factbook entry?
The current one: .5-.75%, Buddhist .5-.75%, other .5-1.0%, none 23-28%
"
Christian (overwhelmingly Roman Catholic) 63-66%, Muslim 7-9%, Jewish
note: France maintains a tradition of secularism and has not officially collected data on religious affiliation since the 1872 national census, which complicates assessments of France's religious composition; an 1872 law prohibiting state authorities from collecting data on individuals' ethnicity or religious beliefs was reaffirmed by a 1978 law emphasizing the prohibition of the collection or exploitation of personal data revealing an individual's race, ethnicity, or political, philosophical, or religious opinions; a 1905 law codified France's separation of Church and State (2015 est.)
"
How about the following solution: Refugees and immigrants from Muslim countries who want to stay in the EU or US need to renounce Islam and convert to one of the less virulent religions, or become atheists. Their rejection of Islam needs to be a public act, which will be broadcast on TV weekly. It would be great propaganda. Any Muslim doing so would also instantly become an enemy of the Islamists, because renouncing Islam is punishable bu death, according to Islamic law. That would actually be a great start, since it would put these new converts on the same side of the fight as the rest of Western Civilization.
Just imagine: Some questionable looking Muslim claims they are persecuted refugees and ISIS wanted to kill them? Well, their televised renunciation of Islam will make sure they are speaking the truth. Anyone who refuses gets sent right back into the desert from which they came from.
How is this in any way, shape or form "news for nerds"?
Take these rubbish politics out of /. as they DO NOT belong here.
Handguns were banned in 1997. Official crime rate information from the Home Office (2002, 2013) indicates that in the five years prior to the ban, 1.2 million violent crimes were reported. After the ban took affect, there were over 5 million violent crimes in the following five years.
Home Office data shows that rape went from 27,000 to nearly 47,000 when potential attackers were assured there was no risk that a law-abiding woman might defend herself with a firearm. Other serious crimes show the same pattern. Total sex offenses increased from 158,000 to over 245,00.
The same occurred in Australia, and to a leeser extent in US cities which have implemented near-bans. The effects of these laws are no longer a matter of predicting what might happen - we've tried it and know what happens. 20,000 more rapes is what happens. Now that you know that, in the future you have the choice- do you want to cause twice as many rapes, or admit that your first guess was wrong?
Maybe it's coincidence, here are the numbers.
Handguns were banned in 1997. Official crime rate information from the Home Office indicates that in the five years prior to the ban, 1.2 million violent crimes were reported. After the ban took affect, there were over 5 million violent crimes in the following five years.
Home Office data shows that rape went from 27,000 to nearly 47,000 when potential attackers were assured there was no risk that a law-abiding woman might defend herself with a firearm. Other serious crimes show the same pattern. For example, total sex offenses increased from 158,000 to over 245,00.
Note I didn't look at just the month before and the month after - month to month numbers may vary by chance; the five years before vs the five years after is long enough you shouldn't see a huge swing by random chance. Note also it's not an increase of 10% or even 25% - crime doubled, no matter how you measure it, and it happened immediately. That's an awfully big coincidence.
The same occurred in Australia, and to a leeser extent in US cities which have implemented near-bans. The effects of these laws are no longer a matter of predicting what might happen - we've tried it and know what happens. 20,000 more rapes is what happens.
The reporting standards for SEXUAL ASSUALT other than "rape" changed around the same time. Tell me how changing the reporting codes for- sexual assault- caused by murder rate to double.
It's hard to admit that your first guess regarding what the outcome might be was wrong. But the actual outcome is 20,000 more women getting raped. In the future, when this issue comes up, you'll have to decide, do you:
a) recognize the available evidence and adjust your predictions
b) stick to your first guess to protect your pride, and advocate policies that cause 20,000 women to be raped
Your choice.
I wasn't ascribing the effect to medicaid; it was due to republican legislators that voted to reject the medicaid expansion money that was being offered to their states. Medicaid could have saved many of those people, or delayed their demise, but it was kept from them.
Currently, the additional load on the medical system is barely noticeable from the standpoint of available professionals to provide treatment. For instance, without enrollment in the ACA in 2015, there were about 280 million people insured in the USA. The ACA added about 18 million. That's under a 7% increase in total patient load on average. That's less noticeable to a doctor's office than what happens when there is a flu outbreak, which is a constantly reoccurring event.
If you can't get proper medical care because there is no money available to pay for it, it doesn't matter how many doctors there are anyway.
Eventually, we are going to see a meaningful shortfall in the number of active physicians due to the age demographics of the group and how many will be retiring compared to the rate of replacement from med schools, and yes, that's going to cause problems - but it's not here yet, and it doesn't in any way excuse the republicans from their responsibility for the early and/or needless deaths they caused by rejecting medicaid expansion.
The price of medical care is not set by scarcity. I was married to a surgeon for many years, and I can tell you first hand that the major expenses were running the office, including paying staff, the charges made by the hospital where she worked for OR time and so forth, and paying insurance. Those numbers were huge. Her income after all that was comfortable, but -- frankly -- I wouldn't indulge in the required number of years of grueling schooling to get it, even for a run of the mill GP. Increasing the number of doctors "because looser rules" would just incur those costs for them as well, and they wouldn't start trying to beat the other doctors prices by a few dollars. If you want to point a finger at significant consumer cost issues, I suggest you find the nearest tort lawyer and stick that finger right up their ass.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
And, what is wrong with that? ... just a thought.
And, why are they "left" if they do that?
And, in what way is blaming America, defending Islamism?
And I wonder if you mix up the words Islam and Islamism
I for my part find the idea that someone puts a label like "left" on one for what he is writing in a forum pretty stupid.
FYI: Calling someone left in my country is quite an insult as you associate left with communism/soviet socialism or even stalinism.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
There... fixed that for ya... That's the one word the entire media are studiously avoiding in every report of these atrocities. I wonder why...
The so-called 'prophet' of Islam was a mass murderer, multiple rapist and a paedophile, who 'married' a nine year old girl when he was fifty four. Muslims call him 'the perfect man'. And you're surprised by any of their crimes?
Any comments?
Although religion was created by the ancient politicians in the first place, it's still in their hand to achieve their goals. So it comes back and haunts the world like this. This is very enlightening: http://www.motherjones.com/pol...
Force them to eat Bacon.
Wrap their dead in pigs skin.
Force their family to eat bacon.
This will "deny" their ascent to heaven.
There will be an outcry. So what.
I have read somewhere that one of the unintended causes of much of the terrorism issues that exist was that when the US invaded IRAQ, they disbanded their Army, essentially putting thousands upon thousands of fighting age men with guns out of work... Not sure how much truth there is to that considering it was 18 years ago, however it does seem plausible at least in part.
think about this if the average person in the crowd was armed and able to defend himself and others how many would have been killed then? People complain about armed citizens yet when armed you do at least stand some chance of defending yourself and living through it. Looked at the so called "gun nuts" in Texas some Muslim radicals show up to kill local citizens and the attackers NOT the locals end up dead. All I can says if you are a religious extremist of ANY religion of any reason draw and attempt to point a firearm at me I will be happy to send you to meet your God of choice.
Anatomy of Caste system; If you're not from my Caste, you're non-human to me; I can abuse/exploit/rape/harm you; Brahmin are covertly promoting Caste for past 2000 years in your country; Expel Brahmin From Your Country; http://wh.gov/iyhMK
Casteism