Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Shooting in Demark
Options
Comments
-
And as is incredibly well documented, had nothing to do with Iraq at all and therefore explains pretty much nothing about where ISIS came from.
You're a great man for taking single posts and replying to them out of context without bothering to read the previous discussion.
The point I made if you bothered to read back was Islamic terrorism didn't just happen after the Iraq invasion. It's been around for a while. Remember the Beiruit bombings of 1983, the Twin Towers 1995, the East African bombings of 1998, 9/11, and countless other acts of terrorism before 2003.
Some people keep saying "Yeh but if the US hadn't invaded Iraq there would be no terrorism in the world" which is frankly silly. It's just their awareness of history was limited until the US becomes involved and then they become interested.0 -
This is nonsense. Atrocities have been around since year dot. Whether you want to call them "terrorist" or not which doesn't really denote anything other than "I'm on the other side."
So car bombs have been around since year dot?
Given that dynamite wasn't invented until the mid 19th century, it was difficult to make a suicide vest for example until then.
You could have dragged a barrel of gunpowder with a fuse around of course, but kind of easy to spot. It wasn't just technological although it played a part.
However I agree that terrorism in one way or another has been around a while but seems to have reached a whole new level lately.0 -
And some people keep saying "if the US hadn't been poking their noses around oil fields from Afghanistan to Libya there would still be terrorist attacks against them" which is stupid.Shurimgreat wrote: »Some people keep saying "Yeh but if the US hadn't invaded Iraq there would be no terrorism in the world" which is frankly silly. It's just their awareness of history was limited until the US becomes involved and then they become interested.
Why haven't ISIS bombed the crap out of, say, Chile or Finland? They should be prime targets for those freedom hating terrorists, right?0 -
Does it?Shurimgreat wrote: »However I agree that terrorism in one way or another has been around a while but seems to have reached a whole new level lately.
More people were killed on this very island by terrorism than by every Islamic attack in Europe in the last 100 years combined. It doesn't feel like much of an escalation unless you get your news from Sky or Fox.
Why are you deliberately trying to move your definition of "terrorism" to car bombs now? Was nobody terrorised before car bombs were invented?0 -
Who has said this? You put it in quotes, but who are you lying about saying this? (I won't say paraphrasing here because nobody has said anything remotely close)Shurimgreat wrote: »Some people keep saying "Yeh but if the US hadn't invaded Iraq there would be no terrorism in the world"0 -
Advertisement
-
Does it?
More people were killed on this very island by terrorism than by every Islamic attack in Europe in the last 100 years combined. It doesn't feel like much of an escalation unless you get your news from Sky or Fox.
Why are you deliberately trying to move your definition of "terrorism" to car bombs now? Was nobody terrorised before car bombs were invented?
And as many people were killed on 9/11 as in the whole of the Troubles, but we won't hear you say anything about that now will we.0 -
I would if the World Trade Centre had been in Europe which is what we were talking about. Or if those attacks had anything at all to do with ISIS.Shurimgreat wrote: »And as many people were killed on 9/11 as in the whole of the Troubles, but we won't hear you say anything about that now will we.
Should I say something about every violent attack in history to avoid you saying I don't want to talk about some attack that isn't relevant?
Won't hear you say anything about pedophiles there now will we.0 -
I would if the World Trade Centre had been in Europe which is what we were talking about. Or if those attacks had anything at all to do with ISIS.
Should I say something about every violent attack in history to avoid you saying I don't want to talk about some attack that isn't relevant?
Won't hear you say anything about pedophiles there now will we.
Right, I'm done with you, your posts are bizarre and inconsistant.0 -
Maiow. Try logic and relevance next time to avoid such embarrassing climbdowns.Shurimgreat wrote: »Right, I'm done with you, your posts are bizarre and inconsistant.0 -
[...]Can you elaborate please.[...]
naturally isis won't divulge all its sources of capital, though it is an open secret that some arab states keep funding them, and then there are income sources like looting, hostage-taking and others...asking people here on boards for details on isis' finances is preposterous and stupid, also malicious in a way, like asking for proof of things that cannot be proven which is quite common around here...i suggest to go and ask the imam or the guys at quran school, sure somebody there will know more about the inner workings of isis...0 -
Advertisement
-
Shurimgreat wrote: »It branched off from AQ around 2012, mainly related to the Syrian Civil War. AQ had no real influence in Syria before the revolution, then gained ground in the vacuam that followed the revolution. It was an AQ branch then as was Al Nusra Front. But ISIS refused to obey AQ orders.
ISIS has far more to do with the Syrian Civil war than the invasion of 2003. Without the Syrian Civil War there would be no ISIS and no tens of thousands of foreigners joining it.
Linking ISIS to the Iraq War is just the same old tired agenda from the same old people. Most people agree on the point ISIS owes its beginnings, influence and strength to the Syrian Civil War. And this partricular group or something similar would have happened with or without the Iraqi conflict. Where-ever you get power vacuams in Muslim nations you get terror groups like this who try to hoover up funds and recruits.
Just how would you solve the problem of ISIS if they came out of the Syrian Civil War? Don't suppose it would involve boots on the ground. Yes another mad operation to fuel conflagration in the region. Ariel Sharon was warned not to go to the temple mount in Jerusalem for fear it would incite an intifada and guess what it did. This civil war is an Islamic thing. We are not that important to them. They should put up a big sign saying "West go away, come back another day".0 -
Why is ISIS getting mentioned when this is about free speech.0
-
Wurzelbert wrote: »naturally isis won't divulge all its sources of capital, though it is an open secret that some arab states keep funding them, and then there are income sources like looting, hostage-taking and others...asking people here on boards for details on isis' finances is preposterous and stupid, also malicious in a way, like asking for proof of things that cannot be proven which is quite common around here...i suggest to go and ask the imam or the guys at quran school, sure somebody there will know more about the inner workings of isis...
Your whole post is stupid, where did I ask for a proof about their funding? quote me instead of lying like you are used to do around here.0 -
-
Why don't you answer my questions about the far right strategies about immigration and Islam? I am still waiting unless you have no answer at all.
Where are the questions...Please re post.
Far right is a term to smear a legitimate opinion of people....For me....Islam has far more in common with other totalitarian systems such as Fascism or Communism.
I don't believe there are any issues with immigration in Denmark other than the people you are referring to as far right would like to continue immigration however not from Muslim countries.0 -
Where are the questions...Please re post.
Just so to be clear, not liking Islam is one thing, spreading lies about Islam is something else, the latter is what is used in these threads and its what I refer to, go and read my posts in the Islam section and see for yourself what I think about parts of Islam as a religion, I criticized a lot without being a complete racist as I engaged in a constructive debate as opposed to spreading lies.There is a huge difference between being anti Islam and anti Muslim.
I have some muslim friends but I find Islam disgusting
Have you read the Coran yourself? if yes please quote what you don't like and then we can have a debate.Have you read the Quran? Sure most Muslims are not extreme...however....Do you know the percentages of Muslims that support the extreme acts carried out?
Do you know the percentage yourself? any reliable source/article to share with us here?I do believe this acts of violence are waking people up. If you check the parties (formally called fringe far right parties by the mainstream left wing media) in countries such as France, Sweden, the Netherlands and so on...they really are gaining traction. I've checked recent polls in all these countries and many parties that are anti Islam will probably win or hold the balance of power in the next respective election in their country
Yes I am well aware about these parties and the polls, now what are they really offering? why are they favorite to win?
they are favorite to win because Europe is going through a deep recession, people have lost the trust of the current parties, will the far right change the recession and bring prosperity? the answer is no, so what's their selling point? being anti-Islam and anti-immigration.
knowing that they can't change the recession they target to most sensitive subject, Islam and immigration, grand so, most muslims in Europe are European by birth, nobody can remove their citizenship, so what the Far right parties are going to do? destroy mosques? ban praying? not give them a job? disallow them from their rights as citizens to social welfare? ban the veil? ban the beard? what are they going to do? do they have a strategy?
well if they do what I think that they are going to do then we will go into a massive discrimination about a group of EU citizens, a group that are already facing a lot of discrimination and that can only lead to a chaos, violence, hate, high level of crime related to race or religion.
What do you think?0 -
-
RobYourBuilder wrote: »Do you not see any problems with the integration of muslims and Europe's current immigration policies?
Absolutely not, there is nothing wrong with the integration of Muslims, what can be and should be done is a deeper scan of who is getting in and a selective process to determine the skills of immigrants VS the needs of the country, religion isn't and shouldn't be part of that process, don't you agree with me? do you see yourself any problems with the integration of muslims and Europe's current immigration policies?0 -
Just so to be clear, not liking Islam is one thing, spreading lies about Islam is something else, the latter is what is used in these threads and its what I refer to, go and read my posts in the Islam section and see for yourself what I think about parts of Islam as a religion, I criticized a lot without being a complete racist as I engaged in a constructive debate as opposed to spreading lies.
Just for clarification purposes...Regarding the racism...what race would that be? What lies are you talking about?Have you read the Coran yourself? if yes please quote what you don't like and then we can have a debate.
I don’t like the numerous parts of the Quran that state a women’s worth is half that of a man’s.
A male shall inherit twice as much as a female. Quran 4:11
Call in two male witnesses from among you, but if two men cannot be found, then one man and two women whom you judge fit to act as witnesses... Quran 2:282,
There are so many more…this rubbish is in Sharia law which is now gradually creeping into part of western countries.
I don’t like the way the prophet married a 6 year old when he was in his 50s and then proceeded with intercourse when she was 9.
I guess the practice of old men marrying kids in Yemen is just coincidental.
We have separated church and state in the west….You want to embrace religion and bring it back into our laws????Do you know the percentage yourself? any reliable source/article to share with us here?
I can't post links as I a a new user..Check the Pew polls on the middle east in google
Mostly people want Sharia Law on average at the scale of 80%...Egypt is 74%
Even after the massacre in Paris, we still get people protesting not at the killings but at the portrayal of the prophet in a magazine….gimme a break
They are going up in the polls because of increased attacks on our way of life(freedom of speech, satire, and so on) and also because more and more people are seeing the stories such as the rape gang in Rotherham, the over representation of Muslims in crime, the hypocrisy of allowing mosques in the west but churches being outlawed in places like Saudi Arabia and many other factors also….Yes I am well aware about these parties and the polls, now what are they really offering? why are they favorite to win?
I see countries such as Denmark and the Netherlands are very tolerant places…Muslim population has doubled in 10 years in Sweden and Denmark. I guess people are noticing life is changing…That’s what I get when I speak to the people I know from Denmark anyway.they are favorite to win because Europe is going through a deep recession, people have lost the trust of the current parties, will the far right change the recession and bring prosperity? the answer is no, so what's their selling point? being anti-Islam and anti-immigration.
People in Europe don’t have a problem with immigration. They have a problem with Islamic immigration where people do not respect the law. I couldn’t believe it when my old boss who was Dutch(and black) was complaining about the Moroccans involved in crime.
Do you know the figures on this? If you believe Sharia law is above a countries law, then of course you will see stuff like this.
Recession? Why aren’t they voting right wing in the Southern European countries where the recession is a lot worse? Spain has many immigrants from Latin America...Immigration is not the problem. Islam is the problem. If you want far right wing…try the laws of Saudi Arabia…You want to bring that stuff to Europe? Too late I guess, some of it is here already.knowing that they can't change the recession they target to most sensitive subject, Islam and immigration, grand so, most muslims in Europe are European by birth, nobody can remove their citizenship, so what the Far right parties are going to do? destroy mosques? ban praying? not give them a job? disallow them from their rights as citizens to social welfare? ban the veil? ban the beard? what are they going to do? do they have a strategy?
Who said they will destroy mosques? Now, who’s making up lies. I do not support banning anything.well if they do what I think that they are going to do then we will go into a massive discrimination about a group of EU citizens, a group that are already facing a lot of discrimination and that can only lead to a chaos, violence, hate, high level of crime related to race or religion.
What do you think?
All I support is to be tolerant to those who are tolerant to us….Islam and Fascism are very similar in their totalitarian views. We should not say all cultures are equal. For example, female circumcision is something that I think we could do without. Honour Killings, Marrying of children…all of this stuff. Sure 99% of muslims are tolerant…perhaps even 99.9% That’s still quite a large figure that will threaten our way of life…..Freedom of speech may be the first casualty.
Thanks Goodness people are waking up and your views are gradually becoming the minority0 -
Absolutely not, there is nothing wrong with the integration of Muslims, what can be and should be done is a deeper scan of who is getting in and a selective process to determine the skills of immigrants VS the needs of the country, religion isn't and shouldn't be part of that process, don't you agree with me? do you see yourself any problems with the integration of muslims and Europe's current immigration policies?
The fact that nearly one in four of all non EU citizens resident are officially unemployed would suggest to me that there is something fundamentally wrong with immigration into the EU.0 -
Advertisement
-
Where are the questions...Please re post.
Far right is a term to smear a legitimate opinion of people....For me....Islam has far more in common with other totalitarian systems such as Fascism or Communism.
I don't believe there are any issues with immigration in Denmark other than the people you are referring to as far right would like to continue immigration however not from Muslim countries.
So-called 'Islamism' is in fact itself the latest of a series of far right ideologies also known as fascism. Any time when religion or national identity of any kind is married to politics, the chances are more often than not a fascist dictatorship forms. Examples in modern times (earlier versions exist too):
-Nazi Germany (and its allies): racial superiority, 'chip on your should' politics, revenge and politics mixed.
-Stalin's USSR: fanatic communism, drive towards modernisation, superpower ambitions mixed with politics.
-Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: imposed backwardness, peasant fascism, absolute monarchy, classism mixed with politics.
Khmer Rouge: imposed backwardness, peasant fascism, ultranationalism mixed with politics.
-Islamic Republic of Iran: imposed backwardness, peasant fascism, incompetence, insecurity, infighting, ultranationalism/superpower ambitions mixed with politics.
-Islamic Emirate of Afghanisan: war, terrorism, ultranationalism, imposed backwardness, peasant fascism, mixed with politics.
-Yugoslavia/Serbia/Bosnia under Milosevic, Karadzic, Arkan, Mladic, etc: neo-Nazism mixed with politics.
-al Qaeda/ISIS: terrorism, sensationalism, neo-Nazism, desire to form a world dominating state mixed with politics.
ALL of the above ruined each of their countries and set them back decades. ALL of the above countries were better off without ALL of the above regimes. And would be better off if these regimes never came to power. Some have recovered (Germany and Europe) but it took decades to erradicate the mess caused by the Nazis and their European and Asian colleagues. Others are on the long path to recovery (Iran and former Yugoslavia are currently under moderate governments but have a long way to go) while others are still a mess and look likely to be for a long long time (obvious who these are).0 -
Your whole post is stupid, where did I ask for a proof about their funding? quote me instead of lying like you are used to do around here.
in your post #589 you asked shurimgreat to elaborate on isis’ funding. where did i say you asked for proof of anything? you are making things up here, but that does not surprise me at all...
and your accusations of lies and putting other posters on the blacklist and all that...pure bigotry and a fundamental hatred of everything and everyone non-muslim and symptoms of the victim mentality so prevalent among muslims today...there are reasons muslim zealots and apologists are not the most popular people outside the world of islam...0 -
RobYourBuilder wrote: »The fact that nearly one in four of all non EU citizens resident are officially unemployed would suggest to me that there is something fundamentally wrong with immigration into the EU.
That's a poor assessment to make and a fairly glib one. If the fact that you assert is in fact, a fact, then in order to come to a better conclusion you ought to be digging a little deeper and asking WHY are 1 in 4 unemployed? Are they discriminated against and thus not able to find gainful employment? Are they not permitted to work as a result of being refugees from places of unrest?
Simply stating that policy is wrongminded because 25% aren't working is a lame deduction.0 -
That's a poor assessment to make and a fairly glib one. If the fact that you assert is in fact, a fact, then in order to come to a better conclusion you ought to be digging a little deeper and asking WHY are 1 in 4 unemployed? Are they discriminated against and thus not able to find gainful employment? Are they not permitted to work as a result of being refugees from places of unrest?
Simply stating that policy is wrongminded because 25% aren't working is a lame deduction.
The problem is that the same people who are saying high level numbers don't give an accurate view of the situation are often refusing the collection of more detailed statistics on the basis that it would stigmatise certain groups of people.
It is pretty clear that some cultures integrate better in our society than others. As a nation why would we not be allowed to document this and use the result as one parameter to regulate immigration flows?
There also is another more tricky question of what integration is. Is it just having a job, paying taxes, and not breaking the law? Or is it assimilation: slowing changing your own culture to the indigenous one and wanting your children feel like a member of the dominant cultural group of you host country rather that your culture of origin?0 -
Just so to be clear, not liking Islam is one thing, spreading lies about Islam is something else, the latter is what is used in these threads and its what I refer to, go and read my posts in the Islam section and see for yourself what I think about parts of Islam as a religion, I criticized a lot without being a complete racist as I engaged in a constructive debate as opposed to spreading lies.
Have you read the Coran yourself? if yes please quote what you don't like and then we can have a debate.
Do you know the percentage yourself? any reliable source/article to share with us here?
Yes I am well aware about these parties and the polls, now what are they really offering? why are they favorite to win?
they are favorite to win because Europe is going through a deep recession, people have lost the trust of the current parties, will the far right change the recession and bring prosperity? the answer is no, so what's their selling point? being anti-Islam and anti-immigration.
knowing that they can't change the recession they target to most sensitive subject, Islam and immigration, grand so, most muslims in Europe are European by birth, nobody can remove their citizenship, so what the Far right parties are going to do? destroy mosques? ban praying? not give them a job? disallow them from their rights as citizens to social welfare? ban the veil? ban the beard? what are they going to do? do they have a strategy?
well if they do what I think that they are going to do then we will go into a massive discrimination about a group of EU citizens, a group that are already facing a lot of discrimination and that can only lead to a chaos, violence, hate, high level of crime related to race or religion.
What do you think?
The far right of Europe seem to have very colourful relationships with 'Islamic' fascists. There's a lot of articles profiling leaders of far right parties. This is the profile of an Irishman who leads one in the UK:
http://www.stopthebnp.org.uk/uncovered/pg03.htm
Ever since Alois Brunner (Nazi), there has been a relationship between Arab nationalists, Islamists and far right Europeans when it suited. Support for (then) radical regimes in the Middle East was given by such parties: support for the enemies of their domestic enemies like Thatcher, Mitterand, etc.
It is ONLY when 'Islamism' poses a threat to their own countries and is a concern among voters do they condemn it. It is fine in its own place and can be used. But not fine in Europe. Simple as.
Holocaust denial, racism, forced ideology and one party state desires are common with 'Islamic' and European fascists.0 -
BuilderPlumber wrote: »The far right of Europe seem to have very colourful relationships with 'Islamic' fascists. There's a lot of articles profiling leaders of far right parties. This is the profile of an Irishman who leads one in the UK:
http://www.stopthebnp.org.uk/uncovered/pg03.htm
Ever since Alois Brunner (Nazi), there has been a relationship between Arab nationalists, Islamists and far right Europeans when it suited. Support for (then) radical regimes in the Middle East was given by such parties: support for the enemies of their domestic enemies like Thatcher, Mitterand, etc.
It is ONLY when 'Islamism' poses a threat to their own countries and is a concern among voters do they condemn it. It is fine in its own place and can be used. But not fine in Europe. Simple as.
Holocaust denial, racism, forced ideology and one party state desires are common with 'Islamic' and European fascists.
Many Nazis sought safe havens in Muslim countries as they were exiled from most of the world especially Europe. Perhaps they should be allowed to return to Europe instead of broadcasting their hate. We can't really blame Arab countries for allowing them entry. They brought with them their insidious ideology. In any case those Nazis have become part of Muslim societies now. Operating under the radar as subversive agitators and anti American, anti Israeli and anti UN forces.0 -
Hajj Saeed, Imam of the Al-Faruq Mosque in Copenhagen, Denmark, rejected interfaith dialogue in a Friday sermon delivered on February 13, one day before the Copenhagen terror attacks. Imam Saeed explained that the Prophet Muhammad waged war against his Jewish neighbors in Al-Madina rather than engage in dialogue with them. The sermon was posted on the Internet by the Scandinavian chapter of Hizb ut-Tahrir.
0 -
KingBrian2 wrote: »Many Nazis sought safe havens in Muslim countries as they were exiled from most of the world especially Europe. Perhaps they should be allowed to return to Europe instead of broadcasting their hate. We can't really blame Arab countries for allowing them entry. They brought with them their insidious ideology. In any case those Nazis have become part of Muslim societies now. Operating under the radar as subversive agitators and anti American, anti Israeli and anti UN forces.
This is the little known history. Many ex Nazis fled to either Latin America and the Middle East after the war. As the cold war took hold and Stalin's USSR and his communist satellites the new 'Axis of Evil', suddenly a few Nazis here and there was of no great concern. But clearly the likes of Alois Brunner was important in arming and training the new Arab nationalist dictators and later 'Islamic' regimes. Again, no one in the West really cared and the view was that they'd be handy to go up against the USSR. Even Israel was not overly concerned and may have helped elements who may or may not have had Nazi help to cause difficulties for existing regimes. Hamas initially got a boost from Israel to cause trouble for the then stronger PLO for example.0 -
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/denmark/11426348/Copenhagen-shootings-Hundreds-attend-funeral-of-gunman.htmlHundreds of people on Friday attended the Islamic burial of the gunman who killed two people in twin shootings in Copenhagen last weekend.
Omar El-Hussein, 22, was placed in an unmarked grave in the Muslim cemetery in Broendby, on the outskirts of Copenhagen, watched by around 500 people, mostly young men wearing thick black jackets against the cold and rain, an AFP reporter said.0 -
Advertisement
-
The ISIS hit one of us. We hit xxxx of them.0
Advertisement