Slashdot Mirror
Terrorist Attack In Brussels Airport and Metro Station: At Least 34 Dead (mirror.co.uk)
SomeoneFromBelgium writes: This morning there was a double bomb explosion in Brussels, Belgium. In the National Airport entrance hall an estimated 13 people were killed by a big explosion; around the same time another bomb exploded in Metro station 'Maalbeek,' close to the financial district, killing an estimated 10 persons.
Note: story updates bump this figure ot at least 34 deaths. Reader jones_supa adds Shots were fired and Arabic shouted before the blasts,
suggesting a terrorist attack. Video and images on social media showed smoke rising from an airport building and shattered windows. Confused and shocked passengers fled the terminal to safety as they were evacuated by armed police. Footage showed rubbish littered across the floor. All traffic from and to the airport has been suspended. The airport is monitoring the situation closely and will deliver further announcements in Twitter. Update: 03/22 13:06 GMT by T : According to the New York Times and other sources, at least one of the explosions was set off by a suicide bomber. Slate has an actively updating stream of updates about the attack, too.
More than 50 people die in accidents on European roads on average per day. These terrorist attacks are horrible, but we need to deal with them as a problem, not let our countries deteriorate in a frightened panic. Any one of us is still far more likely to die in a number of ways that we have long accepted as risks which are ultimately unavoidable if we want to sustain our way of life. We can't stop driving just because people die in road accidents, and we can't stop being free just because people die in terrorist attacks. If you advocate for more surveillance and the erosion of civil liberties in response to these attacks, you are cooperating with the terrorists in their attempt to undermine the fundamental values of our society.
We need to do a proper investigation to really understand who did what and why, but my initial suspicion is that it was Muslim extremists, likely related to the ISIS terrorists that operate in the Middle East.
In the wake of the terror attacks, there are already complaints about security failures at European airports. Because the attacks were committed outside of secure areas, there's already talk about extending security farther out. Of course, anything that's not secured is potentially a soft target. Taken to the extreme, this could mean searching anyone upon leaving their homes. This is impractical and these additional security measures won't stop terrorism. They don't address the real issue. Yet I fear these measures are coming, and will extend the reach of surveillance while further eroding privacy.
If you want to stop terrorism, you must identify the issue, and then directly address that issue. A disproportionate amount of attacks are committed by Muslims. The typical response is that most Muslims aren't violent. While that's true, the moderate followers of Islam enable the extremists Muslims to carry out their actions. This has been elegantly stated by Sam Harris, a brilliant neurologist. Instead of being politically correct, it's important to confront the real issue. And that issue is Islam.
Stopping terrorism means stopping Islam. It's not bigoted because being Muslim is a choice. Being Arab or Persian is out of the control of a person. Belief in a fairy tale like the Muslim religion is a choice and a dangerous one. We wouldn't take belief in Zeus seriously in the present day, so why defend Islam? We would be better off extending surveillance and profiling to Muslims. Better still would be to altogether ban Islam. In order to be secure, the root cause of the problems must be addressed. That root cause is Islam, which must be banned.
Perhaps anti-terror agencies could take a page from the narcotics police, where they may routinely quietly arrest a suspect to gain intel on his suppliers and customers.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
Making God Proud Since ... well, forever.
Honestly? Islam needs to schism the way the Church did so that the crazies that are left are easily identified, and the moderates who don't think of violence in any practical way have their own IslamV2.0
I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
I'll believe it when the Christians, Buddhists, and Jews start repeatedly shooting people and blowing themselves up because someone drew a fucking cartoon.
If you advocate for more surveillance and the erosion of civil liberties in response to these attacks, you are cooperating with the terrorists in their attempt to undermine the fundamental values of our society.
You insensitive clod, we need phone decryption to spy on law-abiding citizen, not terrorists!
When the foot seeks the place of the head, the line is crossed. Know your place. Keep your place. Be a shoe.
Regardless of who did what, this sucks. Keeping Belgium in my thoughts today....
I wish I had mod points; and that everyone who will later post could see the wisdom here.
The man sounds on target to me.
We won't win war on terror: Former French PM
" Europe is taking the wrong approach to fighting terrorism, former French Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin has told CNBC.
Speaking immediately after a series of explosions rocked the Belgian capital of Brussels, de Villepin said that they were "tragic events" but added that Europe should be showing that it is sticking to its rule of law and can only "reduce" the threat of terrorism.
"I do believe that our strategy should be very different than the one it is. Much less a military approach than a political approach, trying to find solutions in the Middle East and we are far from doing that," he said."
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
If you really think this is about cartoons, you can just as well claim that the Iraq war was about WMDs and spreading democracy (and that Western democracy is a real problem for the rest of the world).
Donate free food here
I abolutely agree with the above... We don't need our freedom to be restricted because of occasional terrorist attacks. If we allow that then they win, we lose. And as stated above, a lot more people die on the road each day, and nobody cares..
generally i agree with you that MOST non tech stuff doesnt belong. but some of us dont bother checking other pages to often, and when an event like this takes place i dont mind it being posted.
this is the first page i still read in the morning, and i havent heard yet. i have friends in Brussels, thankfully they are all ok, but still. i appreciate the occasional major story. its not like its new either, they posted about 9/11 as well and that was 15 years ago
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
Monotheistic Theo-Fascist mass-murdering Psycho-Cults - I'm just so fed up of them.
Katholics, Protestants, Muslim, Jewish orthodox ... abrahamic book & revelation religions are all the same at variing points in history: Wacko genocide-advocating psycho-cults that have been around for too long. We've always done better whenever we've condemned them to their temples and curbed their power as much as possible.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
Also note that they didn't need to get anything past airport security to do this.
Remember that, next time you're being groped by a TSA agent.
No sig today...
please STFU about your pathetic metal penis extensions... It's time for political correctness to be thrown into the trash can and for the mass deportations of Muslims from Europe... or a Final Solution in 20 years time.
Wow. I've got to hand it to you: A lot of posts on the internet start with "guns are bad", but not a lot of them end with "but Nazis are good".
Please STFU about your pathetic mental penis extensions.
You know who doesn't have this kind of broblem ? Israel.
I don't know. Ask the Palestinians in Israel and they might tell you they have a very big terrorism problem.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
Well, not about cartoons maybe, but Christians certainly shoot and blow other people up based on: skin color, some cartoonish fantasy that a single fertilized cell is a human being, etc.
And lets just stop being PC about all this...and get serious.
The time for profiling has come. Let's face it, this attack has all the markings of another horrible, malicious attack by those damned radical Baptist terrorists.
It has all the signs....open your eyes people, we KNOW where and who the real threat is.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Well incidents of terrorism in western cities doesn't occur every day.
The fact that the group most likely behind it is the most web-wise terrorist group that has ever existed should be of at least a little bit of interest to us here.
You you think you live in isolation? What happens in Brussels won't have effects in the rest of the world? You think that various world leaders are not going to use this as an excuse to bring in more monitoring, loss of rights? If not, let me know where you live, I'd like to move there.
I passed through the metro station where the bomb went off 30 minutes before hand. My wife, only 15 minutes. Either of us could have been caught if the timing had been different.
All public transport in Brussels has been stopped. Taxis are impossible to find - but the streets out of Brussels are mostly blocked, so cars aren't very good anyway. I have no way of getting home, except a very long walk for many hours. Sucks to be me, but sucks more for the people in the train that was behind mine.
Ok, here's an IT angle for you:
The mobile phone network stopped working just after the attacks. The Belgian government recommended people to use social media to communicate. Facebook added a 'I have not been blow up' button (or something like that, I don't use Facebook).
"The best part? I became an ordained minister while not wearing pants." -- CleverNickName
No, it's a justification for breaking up the EU and reinstating border controls like we've had for the vast majority of history. Because there was a goddamn reason we had them.
== Jez ==
Do you miss Firefox? Try Pale Moon.
Only certain 'Christian' factions in the USA.
Yeah, it's always "only some Christians but all Muslims", isn't it?
Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
How many of our freedoms have these terrorists killed already?
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
That's exactly why we need pre-airport security screening! How is this not obvious??? Oh sure, someone will say "but what about the vulnerability of the pre-airport security screening queue?" Well, obviously we just need a queue before that. It's queues all the way down. Just keep this between us though -- if the terrorists discover our methods, the terrorists win.
Ban encryption 2016!
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
This pre-airport security - is what they actually had in the Kiev Borispol airport when I've been there a year ago. Not fun at all.
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
More than 50 people die in accidents on European roads on average per day. These terrorist attacks are horrible, but we need to deal with them as a problem, not let our countries deteriorate in a frightened panic.
A quick calculation shows it takes a total of about 2 days for that many Americans to die from gun related homicides. According to cancer.org there are about 596,690 cancer deaths a year, so cancer does that many in just under an hour.
While I agree with you re: no more mass surveillance, let's be clear: terrorism isn't like car accidents, at all. It's not a random event that just happens. It's the end result of conscious human decision-making to murder as many innocent civilians as possible and to scare the shit out of everyone so their very way of life is affected. It's isn't neutral, natural happenstance; it's the deliberate conducting of the worst kind of evil. And because it's the result of human decision-making -- meaning, someone is actually *deciding* to kill these innocent people -- it's preventable and it can and must be addressed by us, by civilized people. Absolutely, we cannot throw away any more rights -- but we can't stand by and let this become the "new normal." That's what those evil fuckers want, and we cannot let them win.
Would you just shut up with your pathetic bleating.
It's stuff that matters and slashdot has never ever ever been nothing but tech.
What's is with all the whiners about topicality recently?
SJW n. One who posts facts.
And that may be why the two explosions only killed 34 people, rather than twenty times as many on two typical passenger flights.
Indeed.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
How long until we hear how the Belgian police could not anticipate and prevent this attack because the attackers used data encryption? Whether it is true or not doesn't even matter.
This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
In Europe we have Catholics, Lutheran protestants, a small amount of Calvinists, and then the Orthodox church in Eastern Europe. Those can all be denominated under the name of Christians, but as far as I know we do not have any of them running around killing people under the guise of pro-life. That really seems to be a US-only problem.
There was a nice comic about pre-security last summer after the Thalys train shooting. (In French, but self-explanatory.)
No, it's a justification for breaking up the EU and reinstating border controls like we've had for the vast majority of history. Because there was a goddamn reason we had them.
Yeah, because when Europe had border controls, there was no terrorism. Period.
Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
Well, people die of _something_. And since we have virtually wiped out infection diseases, cancer and heart diseases are the main remaining causes of death.
My local paper has news stories about three different shootings in my area that happened yesterday. Eh. Shit happens. People are crazy. No way to prevent all of it.
I don't respond to AC's.
When the Christians are in the news EVERY FUCKING DAY -- right now, in 2016 -- shooting innocent civilians, blowing up car bombs, bulldozing and dynamiting the cultural treasures of other religions, raping children, beheading people for drawing pictures of Christ, etc., all in the name of Jesus, and trying to establish a worldwide Christian nation (and telling people that's what they're doing), then I'll agree. And I mean now. Not hundreds of years ago during the Crusades and not during the Inquisition. I might right fucking now in 2016 in the modern, civilized world. Until then, quit trying to equate what these 7th Century barbarians are doing with any other modern religion, because it's complete bullshit.
> vast majority of history
No, we've had border controls for a very short time, since the WW1.
It's not 1950 anymore, people move around and the economy depends on it. Hundreds of thousands of Europeans (including me) live in one country and work in another. The temporary border controls between Denmark and Sweden causes huge problems, and does not solve any anything. All these terrorists have valid passports.
The only reason we had border in EU for the vast majority of history was solely because we kept declaring war on each other every 30 years. I hope we are past this nonsense.
The only rational and efficient thing we should do isn't going back to smaller incompetent states, but rather having a more integrated union, with more integrated police, law system, information services, and so on. It's time for the Federal Europe, since a global solution is the only answer to a global problem.
Video of some good progressive thrash music
We should ban all religion. This whole "my God is better than your God" dick-measuring contests is what gets everyone killed. Get rid of religion and you take away 99% of all reasons people want to kill each other.
We've had religion for tens of thousands of years, and, there's no documented proof of any god. It's a myth. Stop it, grow up, and take your first steps as a real person from under the shadow of "god made me do it".
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
Yeah, because when Europe had border controls, there was no terrorism. Period.
Yes, because putting a lock on your door and having a criminal break in your house anyway is EXACTLY the same as leaving your door wide open with a big sign in your front yard reading "Free cash and valuables inside!"
I mean, are you seriously arguing that because an odd terrorist might get in anyway, that we should just say "fuck it" and open the borders up to invite them in? Because, if that's what you're saying, I want you to call your mother up and tell her that she raised a dumb fuckwad.
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
Um, Irish Republican Army ring any bells?
Monstar L
There was drastically less terrorism. I can't really think of any significant Europe terrorist attacks between WW2 and the late 90s.
Here's just France and there were several 'of significance' :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
blindly antisocialist = antisocial
You are correct. We should not need to give up our way of life because a subset of the population is hell bent on destroying it.
The problem is the radicals are willing to take radical action to achieve their ends, but western society does not have the political stomach to take the actions needed to solve the issues.
Make no mistake. These terrorist acts will only continue and with greater frequency.
You simply cannot have that many radicals in a population and expect nothing to happen.
You must either..
A. Remove or restrict freedom of moment and Freedom in General
B. Remove the factors which contribute to a person becoming radicalized
C. Remove that portion of the population which is most likely to become radicalized.
D. Ignore the issue and live with constant threat of terrorist attacks.
I know that in the west do not want to appear intolerant and to a large extent we must tolerate some things we do not personally agree with.
But not things which are not compatible with western core beliefs.
We are not at war with Radical Islam. Radical Islam is however at war with us. Unless we fight back, we are going to lose.
No, it's a justification for breaking up the EU and reinstating border controls like we've had for the vast majority of history. Because there was a goddamn reason we had them.
1) Border controls don't do anything to stop people already in the borders from doing harm.
2) Explosives are available in the UK, the same as in Belgium, France and every other country in the world - and if someone wants to blow themselves up and take other people with them - they're going to do it.
Let's say you have border controls between country X and country Y. At any given time, there will be some number of people from each of those countries standing in a line waiting to get home - and thus are a target.
3) You could keep the EU and have border controls anyway (but see point 2 above)
Conclusion: Your anti-EU rant is not really applicable here.
blindly antisocialist = antisocial
How did we ever fly safely before we got groped and fondled?
Oh, I know: We still had our carry-on luggage screened. Like, forever. Which would have stopped this kind of attack against a plane.
If you want to strawman, at least use one that can catch fire.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
When 40% of Muslims living in Britain want Sharia Law (Sharia Law includes death for those who insult Islam)
When 25% of all Muslims living in Britain support the 7/7 attacks
When a majority of Muslims support death sentences for those who leave the faith.
Then it is obvious that Islam has a real problem and is a real threat to the civilized world.
I know this isn't PC, but multiculturalism should not extend to cultures that want to commit violence against others. The quicker we realize this, the quicker we can stop the problem.
See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
My god ... you have a short memory
The Bologna massacre (Italian: strage di Bologna) was a terrorist bombing of the Central Station at Bologna, Italy, on the morning of 2 August 1980, which killed 85 people and wounded more than 200. The attack was carried by the neo-fascist terrorist organization Nuclei Armati Rivoluzionari (which always denied any involvement); other theories have been proposed, especially in correlation with the strategy of tension.
Time for bed, said Zebedee - boing
Funny, if you google "Europe terrorist attacks between WW2 and the late 90s." you get this: http://qz.com/558597/charted-t... (tl;dr: terrorism has been decreasing in Europe since the 70s, except for a peak in 2004 (Madrid bombings) and 2015 (Paris)). We've had Basques, IRA, Palestinians, extreme-left in Germany and France, extreme right in Italy... maybe you weren't paying attention at the time, but the current wave of terrorism is nothing new here, sadly.
That's exactly why we need pre-airport security screening! How is this not obvious???
I think they have that. At least... I got groped in a bar last Thursday, and I assumed it was part of a security screening.
I could think of a few.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
How did we ever fly safely before we got groped and fondled?
Oh, I know: We still had our carry-on luggage screened. Like, forever. Which would have stopped this kind of attack against a plane.
If you want to strawman, at least use one that can catch fire.
Errm, does a suicide-west count as carry-on luggage? Can it be detected by "groping"?
Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
Also, Baader Meinhof.
These people were killed by bombs. I don't think a personal firearm would have helped them if that's what you were implying.
I understand your point, but can you point to the last time that a baptist blew themselves up?
Suicide bombing has long been used.
The Chinese suicide squads during the 1911 revolution and again during the second Sino-Japanese war.
Another famous example us the Japanese Kamikaze pilots in WW2.
Hell, even the Germans did it during the battle of Berlin.
In all those cases, one group was at war with the target group.
You cannot deny that Radical Islamic terrorist are at war with you. You are their enemy. Do you think that because you have nothing against them that they dont want you dead?
Sure, we have our brand of crazies who see the US government as a target. The uni-bomber for example.
But when was the last time that one of these guys went to a mall or shopping center and detonated a vest to blow up women and children?
What do you call a man with a hotel on his head?
Normal Tebbit.
The IRA in Britain, the RAF/Baader-Meinhof Group in Germany, and the ETA in France and Spain are just three of many major terrorist groups who committed wide ranging atrocities in Europe between WW2 and the late 90s. The IRA even managed to kill several members of Margaret Thatcher's cabinet, maiming many others including her right hand man Norman Tebbit (hence the above joke, popular in school yards throughout the UK after it happened), in one bombing in the mid-eighties. What Western Governments have the Islamic terrorists tried to wipe out?
Kinda tired of hearing this "Islamic Terror is a special kind of threat" nonsense from the usual suspects. No, it's not. Some of what they've done is worse, but in the grand scheme of things they're still pathetic and minor compared to the home grown conflicts that have plagued Europe for centuries.
Stop being scared of these cretins.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
Consider this: the IRA used to ring ahead of time to warn people to get out because they had planted a bomb there.
They wanted to scare people and blow shit up, sure. But they wanted to AVOID killing people (including themselves).
== Jez ==
Do you miss Firefox? Try Pale Moon.
I read the summary of this, and my thought was - "I'm shocked it took this long to happen" - That said, I am surprised they just went for the entrance hall and not the security lines.
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
I run the IT for an organisation that I am not going to link to here because we're already having trouble dealing with the load today. We're based out of the International Press Center, a small tower behind the Berlaymont that also houses the local branches of Bloomberg and the BBC. Half of us (including myself) go through Maelbeek every day since it's the stop before Schuman, the other half come from the other direction. I was in the subway before the one that blew up; I heard the thump and saw the smoke from Maelbeek as I was getting out of the subway at Schuman; I assumed it was an electrical fire or something and went on to work. We are still on "lock down" in our tower, some of the journalists have been here since 6:00AM and nobody in the building has anything to eat.
You won't see many pictures of this in main stream media, but this is what happened to the subway that was bombed. The cars in the Brussels subway are arranged with blocks of four seats on either side of a central aisle. There is a door and standing space between each set of 8 seats. The blocks are very solid and designed to protect the passengers in them in the event of a subway crash. During rush hour the seats are full and you usually have about twice as many people standing in the open space. In the picture you can see that the bomb went off in the middle of one of these blocks of eight. I can just about guarantee that those seats were full, so we know where half the subway dead came from right there. It looks like the block of seats just behind that block held together (to the right of the image), even though the shifted some, so I would suppose that those people in that set of 8 survived. It looks like the areas between the explosion row and the surviving row and the explosion row and the bulkhead to the left of the image were not very survivable. I guess it would depend on how much shrapnel was in the bomb and how many bodies were shielding you.
I go into this detail because I want to make a point: the terrorist will always get through. We cannot get around this situation with more security. There will always be places where people are forced to congregate and you can't secure them. We can't even get people to buy tickets reliably in the subway; forget about frisking everybody with bulky clothes who rides the subway. True, you can't bomb an airliner anymore, but you sure as hell can bomb the new bottleneck at airport security. Yet the PM of France is already calling for greater intelligence cooperation, which we all know is a euphemism for greater surveillance.
This could have been me: I missed this train by less than five minutes. As one of the people who was targeted today, I would like to ask all Europeans on this forum to make their voices heard in their own countries: WE WILL NOT BE TERRORIZED! We know that the world is a risky place. Don't ruin our liberty and solidarity trying to legislate that risk away.
I've long said that it wouldn't be long before terrorists blew themselves up before the security checkpoint. I figured they would do it on line for security during a busy day, but the check-in line was (in hindsight) another target likely to cause maximum casualties with minimal risk of being stopped. Are they going to move the checkpoints to the airport entrances now? (Somehow accounting for the fact that people won't have boarding passes.) Then the attacks will just happen in the inevitable line leading up to the checkpoint. That's the main trouble with TSA-style checkpoints: No matter where you place them, there's always another target.
Of course, the risk of being killed by a terrorist is very low. Worldwide, there were 32,727 terrorism related fatalities in 2014 (the most recent statistic I could find). This is out of about 7 billion people, so your risk of being killed by a terrorist was about 0.0005%. Even if we doubled the terrorism fatalities (perhaps to account for other deaths weren't labeled as terrorism but might be stretched to fall under that), we'd only get to a 0.001% risk.
Obviously, living in different areas of the world gives you a greater or lower risk. If you live in Iraq, you likely have a higher risk than if you live in Smalltown, Kansas. However, you have a far greater risk of dying in a car accident (1.25 million deaths worldwide in 2013, or a 0.02% risk) than by terrorist.
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
No, the arrest didn't make them any more determined to kill innocent people. If any thing, it only caused them to expedite the plans they already had out of fear they would soon be discovered when the arrested terrorists ratted on them.
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
Sometimes they did that, often they didn't. There are numerous cases where no call was made. In particular they pretty much never phoned in a warning if the principle targets of the bombing were connected to the UK government, be they soldiers, politicians, or sometimes even more minor officials. This was regardless of whether others were likely to get killed.
Some others, like the Birmingham Pub Bombings, they never even accepted responsibility for (until after the conflict), apparently seeing them as a way to promote fear without wanting the blame.
Still others the bomb warning was misleading or incomplete. In the Warrington bombings, for example, they claimed a bomb was planted at a particular store in the city center. They made a second call warning of a bomb but with no indication of where it was, not even mentioning a city. They had, in fact, planted two in Warrington, one that was near to that store fitting the first call's description, and one 100 yards away, in an area likely to be filled with evacuated civilians.
Sometimes the IRA wanted to avoid killing "civilians" (not people, just civilians), but more often than not, they were happy to kill them. And the calls were made for all kinds of reasons, including just wanting the UK government to take the blame when civilians inevitably ended up murdered.
The IRA's political aim, a united Ireland against a backdrop of centuries of English Protestant oppression, is laudable, but don't confuse that laudability with the people who ran that group.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
yeah 0 to 8 killed in a year since the 1970s, until the MUSLIM TERRORISTS killed 20 in Jan 2015, 130 in November 2015, and now this
The Christians only stopped being in the news in the UK every day killing each other for being the wrong flavour of Christian when some time around 2001 the citizens of New York suddenly decided that funding terrorism wasn't cool anymore.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
If you're serious about this they've already won.
Ponder on that for a minute.
Well, maybe because Slashdot used to be a tech site ?
It was "news for nerds, stuff that matters". It's had politics and other non-tech stuff since forever.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
No it's not. There's no evidence that it's a peaceful religion. It has never been a peaceful religion, and it won't be until it is reformed or destroyed.
Let me tell you how it is on the A'dam airport. No matter how much security you have there is a moment when after check-in the travelers go through the passport/screening control. In order to make it "safer" passengers from 20-30 check in lines go through the same passport control.
So, you walk through the airport's door [completely unguarded] and within 20 paces you are in the middle of THOUSANDS of people waiting for the passport control. If you are quick it would take about 3-5 seconds to rush in and detonate yourself...even if there were fully armed guards you can do it....so you need a control point before the control point before the control point...
That is why someone above was joking about "it's queues all the way down". Complete security is an impossibility, therefore no amount of money spent and restrictions placed will help you. Never. There will always be gatherings of people that cannot be secured [school, disco, cafes, church, hospital, company building, sport events ...the list is endless]....we cannot give up all those activities and we cannot make them 100% secure.
Kinda tired of hearing this "Islamic Terror is a special kind of threat" nonsense from the usual suspects. No, it's not. Some of what they've done is worse, but in the grand scheme of things they're still pathetic and minor compared to the home grown conflicts that have plagued Europe for centuries.
Because Europe stopped the Islamic hordes at the gates of Vienna centuries ago. They are now back and have flooded Europe, which has welcomed them with open arms. They have not changed. The do not assimilate. They reproduce far more quickly then the native populations. This is only the beginning.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
I know that you're kidding but at the same time it really highlights for me how some groups are more equal than others.
This could have been me: I missed this train by less than five minutes. As one of the people who was targeted today, I would like to ask all Europeans on this forum to make their voices heard in their own countries: WE WILL NOT BE TERRORIZED! We know that the world is a risky place. Don't ruin our liberty and solidarity trying to legislate that risk away.
Very well said, and stay safe.
Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.
It was not pocket knives but "carpet knives". No idea what the correct english term is. And yes it will work again and again.
A flight captain and his co pilot need nerves of steel to listen to the screams of the stewardesses in the cabin and not react on the demands of he hijackers.
I wish you that you are never in a situation like that.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Remember, people have committed atrocities in the name of Jesus Christ.
Give me a single quote by Jesus Christ, telling his people to "Kill infidels" or its equivalent. Just one.
People kill. Some religions promote killing, others do not. Religions that promote killing ("Smite them in the neck" ) are not peaceful. Those that promote peace ("Turn the other cheek") do not.
Moral equivocation is why you cannot distinguish the difference between Islam and Christianity (or Judaism, Buddhism, Taoism).
And yes, all religions have followers that committed horrible crimes, even atheism has, It doesn't excuse it or make them morally equivalent,
But here is a test, pee in a cup with a crucifix (or bible or ...) and see what happens. Pee on a Koran, and see what happens. Go ahead, I dare you. One would be called "art" and the other "Racist bigotry", morally equivalent ... right?
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Not Jesus (who almost certainly never existed) but God himself says it repeatedly:
Deuteronomy 17
If there be found among you, within any of thy gates which the LORD thy God giveth thee, man or woman, that hath wrought wickedness in the sight of the LORD thy God, in transgressing his covenant; 17:3 And hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I have not commanded; 17:4 And it be told thee, and thou hast heard of it, and enquired diligently, and, behold, it be true, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought in Israel; 17:5 Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die.
-
Deuteronomy 13:
6 If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, “Let us go and worship other gods” (gods that neither you nor your ancestors have known, 7 gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other), 8 do not yield to them or listen to them. Show them no pity. Do not spare them or shield them. 9 You must certainly put them to death. Your hand must be the first in putting them to death, and then the hands of all the people. 10 Stone them to death, because they tried to turn you away from the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. 11 Then all Israel will hear and be afraid, and no one among you will do such an evil thing again.
12 If you hear it said about one of the towns the Lord your God is giving you to live in
13 that troublemakers have arisen among you and have led the people of their town astray, saying, “Let us go and worship other gods” (gods you have not known),
14 then you must inquire, probe and investigate it thoroughly. And if it is true and it has been proved that this detestable thing has been done among you,
15 you must certainly put to the sword all who live in that town. You must destroy it completely, both its people and its livestock.
16 You are to gather all the plunder of the town into the middle of the public square and completely burn the town and all its plunder as a whole burnt offering to the Lord your God. That town is to remain a ruin forever, never to be rebuilt.
Or Numbers 31, where God commands the Israelites to attack Midian and kill all the men, all the married women and all the male children but to keep the virgin females as the spoils of war and distribute them among the soldiers. The reason offered for that barbarism? Two Midianite women had allegedly “tempted” two Israelite men to worship other gods.
There are also New Testament passages cited as justification to kill non-believers, e.g.
Luke 19:27:
But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.
Be honest- there are plenty of Christians who would love to kill non-believers if they thought they could get away with it (like they did for centuries before the modern era). Mod me down all you like- you know it's true (and you'll just be proving my point).
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
Border controls seem to work pretty well for Israel... Likewise a policy of profiling.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
" The IRA's political aim, a united Ireland against a backdrop of centuries of English Protestant oppression, is laudable, but don't confuse that laudability with the people who ran that group.
The logic of a united Ireland is as reasonable as the USA conquering Canada. Whilst this was the intention of US foreign policy at one time, the US has grown out of it. The concept of accepting the settled that have emerged as a result of colonialism is a fraught one, but it has worked better in Africa, and until recently the Middle East, than the alternative of fighting it out.
The issue of 'oppression' is of course more complex, though blaming the 'English' shows a lack of knowledge, given that Ulster Protestants are mainly of Scottish origin, as indicated by the prevalence of Presbyterianism as the main churches. In retrospect it's obvious that the Catholics were being oppressed; but that was hard for everyone to admit at the time. We've got to the point now where a really messy constitution is up and running that has begun to build trust, but the situation is still on a knife edge.
Islam is as peaceful as christianity and judaism.
Actually all those religions (and a few more) believe in the same god
You are an Idiot!
Great work mentioning two that went through reforms.
*5 stars. Would laugh at stupid comment again*
But on a more serious note: The god they believe in has zero to do with anything. But thanks for playing.
Central to Christianity is that Jesus WAS God. He is part of the trinity: God, Son, Holy Spirit. Three in one. God made flesh on the Earth.
Central to Islam is that Jesus was just a prophet, and wasn't even the best as that was reserved for Mohammed. Neither of which were God incarnate on Earth. So no, not even close to having its roots in Christianity.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
What do you mean by "this" ?
OP isn't claiming the Brussels attacks are about cartoons, he mentioned them as an example of how stupid it is to say Islam has nothing to do with terrorism, etc.
Nope, there's plenty of big money behind it. You only refuse to acknowledge the role your great bickering empires play in this. And you usefully spread their bigoted propaganda to keep the game going.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
There are Muslims and Christians in the Israeli Parliament, and there are no laws restricting their freedom of religion. Now, bounce over just a few dozen miles and if you're Jewish or Christian, not only do you have zero rights it's perfectly OK to kill you. Yeah, that's really equivalent!
PS: Israelis are also people of Palestine (the Roman name for the land where Israel was at the time the Romans ruled itl). You don't mean "Palestinians" as there are plenty of them living legally and without problem within Israel. The converse though, Israelis/Jews (also Palestinian) living in Palestine, is not common at all.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Just a reminder: the Old Testament is still part of the bible. Those books are full of God commanding the Israelites to kill their enemies. A prime example would be the genocide of the Canaanites: God commanded them to kill all of the Canaanites, but the Israelis took the women and children as concubines/slaves. God was then angry at them for not having slaughtered the women and children. That is only one example, and there are many.
You can argue that the Old Testament is no longer valid, but then you also have to throw out the ten commandments, the garden of eden, and almost everything used in the gay-marriage debates. You also have to question why those passages are still part of modern Christianity's holy book.
It is also silly to paint Christianity as a religion of pease, and Islam as one of war. Both from historical points (the Crusades being an easy example) and from general numbers: there are 2.75 million muslims living in the U.S. now, and 1.6 billion in the world. If Islam really was a religion of war, you would expect total chaos. But since we don't see that, it is a much more reasonable interpretation that these extremists don't represent the religion.
This exactly.
You have 300 passengers and usually about 3-6 hijackers. If only 2 percent of the people think "Fuck it, I'm dead anyway if those asshats get what they want, I risk it", you are already the majority.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
It is not. Unlike Christianity, which leaves "Cæsar's to Cæsar", Islam prescribes in detail, how the State must operate. And whereas Judaism discourages proselytizing, Islam compels followers to spread the religion world-wide — at the point of a weapon, if need be.
The reasonably peaceful Muslim societies are the ones, where the native language is far from the original Arabic and the faithful thus get their dose of scripture through clergy. Those able to read it themselves can easily become radicalized...
Wow, what an insightful way to end any argument...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Those Irishmen aren't driven by their religion, but rather by their nationalism. A rather different sentiment...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
I cannot decide which is more shameful: A) The act of terrorism and all of the death caused or B) The act of pretending radical islam is not at war with western culture (leftist hawkish western culture, that is) or C) Moderating or hiding this post because you disagree with B or C.
I mentioned this incident to my very liberal west coast girlfriend this morning and she immediately did not want to talk about it because 'I don't share your beliefs on the matter'. I inquired, "which beliefs? the one that radical Islam wants to kill Americans indiscriminately?".
So I am still standing by my position and that of Donald Trump and that of every president before when in a time of war suggested that we stifle the flow of immigrants from nations at war with us.
It is worth mentioning that ISIS/ISIL is NOT a nation. They have no borders and whether or not any world leaders recognize them they have no claim to any borders. In fact they aren't even so much a movement as they are a radical ideological group. This is a stateless entity waging a holy war against the entire non-hardline-stone-age-muslim world.
And the muslims that I do know here? Are they denouncing ISIL/ISIS? sparingly 'maybe'. They don't bring it up and they don't talk about it. If Racheal Maddow says that Donald Trump is a racist one of them is very quick to send me a link. If ISIL blows up an airport, I get links to how 9/11 was an inside job. Suggesting that it is immoral that the left and elite like to send what is largely increasingly impoverished middle and poor class white southern children into non-congressionally-declared-wars and then demonize them as racists and bigots when these same people suggest that they don't want to be at war or that the washington elite criminals are invoking, provoking, and continuing these wars with shoulder shrugs and 'what difference does it make', this individual says "you can't talk about not being at war now that big bad ISIS is at large."
Well I'm sorry to all of the non radical hardline muslims but I disagree with your .8% of the US population and the brainwashed leftists. It is time we do like we did the Japanese in WWII times. F the left.
Luke 19:27 is a parable. It wasn't a command given to his believers.
Oh, it's always a "parable" when you don't like what it says or when the content is blatantly hateful or doesn't jibe with your personal interpretation of what you think is right. But the rest is always to be taken literally, right? It's the "literal WORD OF GOD", right? lol
-
The other two are NOT Jesus commands to his followers either.
Umm, but Jesus is God, isn't he? That's what your bible says, over and over. That's what all the preachers and priests say. Are they wrong, or are you?
-
Be honest, there are plenty of Atheists who would kill religious people if given a chance.
Sure, I'll be honest- I've never known an atheist who says he or she would like to "kill religious people", not one. We would be happy if religion died and took all of its hatred and bigotry with it, but no atheist I know has ever said they'd like to kill religious people.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
They should all be rounded up and deported aboard container ships to the Middle East.
Has it never occurred to you that most immigrants from the Middle East are in your (and my) fine country precisely because they don't like murderous regimes, suicide bombs, and countries which don't respect human rights? Or is that too obvious?
Every Muslin has blood on their hands.
Oh, wait, I see what you're saying. Yeah, lightweight cotton is evil. Death's too good for it, I say.
sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
I have no dog in this fight, but you are confusing the Old Testament (the Hebrew scriptures, including Deuteronomy and Leviticus and the passages you cite above) with the New Testament (the teachings of Jesus per his disciples, including the Gospel of Luke). Yes, the Old Testament God was a rather ornery fellow who did have a habit of smiting people, but he's very different than Jesus (e.g., he's worshiped by the Jews, who don't believe Jesus to be the Son of God). The New Testament is generally called the Word of Jesus, but yeah, it's more accurately acknowledged to have been written by people he taught than by Jesus himself. Case in point: Luke. But if you want to get at what Jesus actually said, it's more correct to look towards the New Testament than the Old Testament, which predates Christianity and Christ.
You do understand that Israel has Muslims in their government right? There have been Arabs in the Knesset since the beginning. Furthermore, about 21% of Israel proper (not Palestine or the contested territories) is Muslim.
Israel does not treat Muslims badly or poorly. They treat threats poorly and the majority of them can be identified as Muslim but the religion itself or people of the religion is not the primary target. For instance, Israel gave the Kurds weapons for their own defence when the US was contemplating how little involved we could be.
Muslim is ancillary to the claim of apartheid too. If there wasn't a large threat from the Palestinian population, the Palestinians would largely be treated like Arabs living within Israel.
Hey, you're the one that cited the scriptures. One would hope you can tell the difference between a Christian and a Jew.
The religion of Peace, with an exhibition of just how peaceful it is.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.