Nice - Bastille day **mod warning post 1**

RasTa

selastich2 wrote: »

Which bit?


that he was tunsian? Every news source I've seen e.g. cnn http://edition.cnn.com/2016/07/15/europe/nice-france-truck/index.html


sent money home?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3693227/Brother-reveals-violent-drug-crazed-ISIS-soldier-Mohamed-Lahouaiej-Bouhlel-smuggled-84-000-family-Tunisia-DAYS-murdering-84-Nice.html

family haven't seen him since 2012
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/16/nice-attack-bewilders-mohamed-lahouaiej-bouhlel-relatives



Where's the stories that he was french algerian coming from?

Just the money, that's some savings in 8 years as a driver

Arturo Bandini

boege wrote: »

There is no evidence reported yet that he was a strong moslem, in fact the opposite has been reported. Why jump from having a disillusioned depressed suicidal man take this action on his own, to include Islam being a factor?

..and yes I do agree with your last point, There does appear to be a copycat tenancy now for some to take a decision to end their life and to then 'go out in a blaze' - and that is exactly what I am wondering has happened here.

Are you serious? He shouted allahu akbar. It may not of been the work of ISIS but it's an Islamic terrorist attack regardless.

volchitsa

RasTa wrote: »

Just the money, that's some savings in 8 years as a driver

One with a wife (even an ex-wife) and three kids as well.

Well dodgy, if you ask me. Or even if you don't.

It doesn't fit too well with the idea of poor marginalized immigrants either, I'd say if that's legit money, he was doing bloody well for himself! Why would he have a beef with France in that case?

Sunflower 27

Arturo Bandini wrote: »

Are you serious? He shouted allahu akbar. It may not of been the work of ISIS but it's an Islamic terrorist attack regardless.

Does this mean all Muslims are at fault because one crazed lunatic said that? Whether he was Muslim or not, I think caution is needed to not start blaming an entire proportion of the population. Hate is spreading fast and it doesn't help anyone, just makes the crazies stronger.

Irish Praetorian

boege wrote: »

There is no evidence reported yet that he was a strong moslem, in fact the opposite has been reported. Why jump from having a disillusioned depressed suicidal man take this action on his own, to include being a muslim as a factor?

..and yes I do agree with your last point to an extent. There does appear to be a copycat tenancy now for some to take a decision to end their life and to then 'go out in a blaze' - and that is exactly what I am wondering has happened here.

I'm sorry can only 'strong moslems' commit acts in the name of Islamist supremacy or do their victims come back to life if it turns out they occasionally drank a glass of wine?

When it comes to matters of faith, it is pretty much impossible to account for a persons own reckoning of the morality of their acts. He may well have seen his attack as an act of repentance, he may have seen it as a last gasp before going to eternal damnation, we don't know for certain. But we are left with the inextricable fact that terrorism in Europe has been dominated in recent years by Muslims (of whatever devotional level).

selastich2

volchitsa wrote: »

One with a wife (even an ex-wife) and three kids as well.

Well dodgy, if you ask me. Or even if you don't.

It doesn't fit too well with the idea of poor marginalized immigrants either, I'd say if that's legit money, he was doing bloody well for himself! Why would he have a beef with France in that case?

He was also sending regular smaller amounts home on top of that


He must have been trifty.

ISIS called for people to fill up their cars and cause carnage last week

Arturo Bandini

Sunflower 27 wrote: »

Does this mean all Muslims are at fault because one crazed lunatic said that? Whether he was Muslim or not, I think caution is needed to not start blaming an entire proportion of the population. Hate is spreading fast and it doesn't help anyone, just makes the crazies stronger.

No, but it would imply to me that he may of did what he did in the name of Islam.

RWCNT

Arturo Bandini wrote: »

boege wrote: »

There is no evidence reported yet that he was a strong moslem, in fact the opposite has been reported. Why jump from having a disillusioned depressed suicidal man take this action on his own, to include Islam being a factor?

..and yes I do agree with your last point, There does appear to be a copycat tenancy now for some to take a decision to end their life and to then 'go out in a blaze' - and that is exactly what I am wondering has happened here.

Are you serious? He shouted allahu akbar. It may not of been the work of ISIS but it's an Islamic terrorist attack regardless.

Him shouting that isn't exactly definitive evidence. That phrase is something a lot of Muslims say when they think they're about to die, watch some Syrian airstrike vids. I'm not saying your wrong about this being an act of Islamic terrorism, but him shouting that isn't the same as him saying outright that he did this for the glory of Allah.

BoatMad

Sunflower 27 wrote: »

Does this mean all Muslims are at fault because one crazed lunatic said that? Whether he was Muslim or not, I think caution is needed to not start blaming an entire proportion of the population. Hate is spreading fast and it doesn't help anyone, just makes the crazies stronger.

Yes true, but just like the people on the Boshorpus bridge did not really care who they took their revenge on, European citizenry will demand that they can feel safe in their homes and country and they will " allow" considerable action to be taken against the whole Muslim community on the back of that

There is considerable precedence for this , we are very close to European states having to take drastic actions to preserve their way of life

will innocent Muslims get caught up in that , absolutely , Theres is nothing that can be done other wise, innocents alway suffer as sides polarise in any conflict ( and this is a conflict ) As sections of the Muslim populations radicalises, so does European public option in opposition to that

Then the crack down starts

selastich2

RWCNT wrote: »

Him shouting that isn't exactly definitive evidence. That phrase is something a lot of Muslims say when they think they're about to die, watch some Syrian airstrike vids. I'm not saying your wrong about this being an act of Islamic terrorism, but him shouting that isn't the same as him saying outright that he did this for the glory of Allah.

It rolls off the tongue easier than "I am doing this for an undetermined secular cause"

BoatMad

RWCNT wrote: »

Him shouting that isn't exactly definitive evidence. That phrase is something a lot of Muslims say when they think they're about to die, watch some Syrian airstrike vids. I'm not saying your wrong about this being an act of Islamic terrorism, but him shouting that isn't the same as him saying outright that he did this for the glory of Allah.

angels on the head of a pin

The action was clearly part of the Jihadi action against France and European citizenry. The exact details of his religious convictions are irrelevant

RWCNT

BoatMad wrote: »

RWCNT wrote: »

Him shouting that isn't exactly definitive evidence. That phrase is something a lot of Muslims say when they think they're about to die, watch some Syrian airstrike vids. I'm not saying your wrong about this being an act of Islamic terrorism, but him shouting that isn't the same as him saying outright that he did this for the glory of Allah.

angels on the head of a pin

The action was clearly part of the Jihadi action against France and European citizenry. The exact details of his religious convictions are irrelevant

Yeah, cool, whatever, I'm just pointing out that him shouting that suggests he was a Muslim and little else.

boege

Arturo Bandini wrote: »

Are you serious? He shouted allahu akbar. It may not of been the work of ISIS but it's an Islamic terrorist attack regardless.

If that all you need to confirm this is a terrorist attack then end of discussion. Do you have a reliable source for someone hearing him shout that (as he drove along inside a truck cabin, ploughing through screaming people, and police shooting at him?)

And, I know Nice quite well, heading there in two weeks. The Muslim area is near the end where he began his awful deed and where the muslim community would have gone to view the fireworks. I think his first victim was a French muslim mother and reported as dressed in traditional muslim outfit.

I am not arguing this is definitely not IS backed, just saying evidence to date is limited and other possibilities exist.

BoatMad

RWCNT wrote: »

Yeah, cool, whatever, I'm just pointing out that him shouting that suggests he was a Muslim and little else.

It was never in doubt that he was a Muslim

RWCNT

BoatMad wrote: »

RWCNT wrote: »

Yeah, cool, whatever, I'm just pointing out that him shouting that suggests he was a Muslim and little else.

It was never in doubt that he was a Muslim

Yeah, that's my point, him shouting that adds nothing in the way of evidence.

BoatMad

boege wrote: »

If that all you need to confirm this is a terrorist attack then end of discussion. Do you have a reliable source for someone hearing him shout that (as he drove along inside a truck cabin, ploughing through screaming people, and police shooting at him?)

And, I know Nice quite well, heading there in two weeks. The Muslim area is near the end where he began his awful deed and where the muslim community would have gone to view the fireworks. I think his first victim was a French muslim mother and reported as dressed in traditional muslim outfit.

I am not arguing this is definitely not IS backed, just saying evidence to date is limited and other possibilities exist.

on the basis of reasonable deduction , i.e. his background as a Muslim, and the fact that IS have claimed him as a " fellow Travellor " we , I think, can adopt a reasonable premise that this was clearly a Islamist Terror strike ( of one form or another )

lets stop pussy footing around, and trying to dissemble , This attack was clearly in the vein of Paris and elsewhere

in my view Internment is now the only option, the US did it in WW2

boege

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

I'm sorry can only 'strong moslems' commit acts in the name of Islamist supremacy or do their victims come back to life if it turns out they occasionally drank a glass of wine?

When it comes to matters of faith, it is pretty much impossible to account for a persons own reckoning of the morality of their acts. He may well have seen his attack as an act of repentance, he may have seen it as a last gasp before going to eternal damnation, we don't know for certain. But we are left with the inextricable fact that terrorism in Europe has been dominated in recent years by Muslims (of whatever devotional level).

You are suggesting that all muslims with suicidal tendencies are terrorists which is plain wrong.

A bitter suicidal man who takes out other people in taking his own life is not doing so to further any cause other than his own desires. His religion is incidental.

An IS suicidal mission, in their own words, is attempting to kill as many infidels as possible because of blind indoctrination by IS. I don't disagree that there there is an IS terrorist treat in Europe - just leaving open the possibility that the actions of this man don't yet fit in that box.

boege

BoatMad wrote: »

on the basis of reasonable deduction , i.e. his background as a Muslim, and the fact that IS have claimed him as a " fellow Travellor " we , I think, can adopt a reasonable premise that this was clearly a Islamist Terror strike ( of one form or another )

lets stop pussy footing around, and trying to dissemble , This attack was clearly in the vein of Paris and elsewhere

in my view Internment is now the only option, the US did it in WW2

With views like that, why stop there. Haters gotta hate!

Tried to have a sensible discussion but then this is after hours. My mistake.

Good day!

Fleawuss

boege wrote: »

With views like that, why stop there. Haters gotta hate!

Tried to have a sensible discussion but then this is after hours. My mistake.

Good day!

"Haters gotta hate" is really waaay too low a bar for AH.

Irish Praetorian

boege wrote: »

You are suggesting that all muslims with suicidal tendencies are terrorists which is plain wrong.

A bitter suicidal man who takes out other people in taking his own life is not doing so to further any cause other than his own desires. His religion is incidental.

An IS suicidal mission, in their own words, is attempting to kill as many infidels as possible because of blind indoctrination by IS. I don't disagree that there there is an IS terrorist treat in Europe - just leaving open the possibility that the actions of this man don't yet fit in that box.

Not quite, I'm suggesting we have a pretty unique problem with our Muslim population if the depressive/disconnected tendencies that exist across society are going to be routinely employed in prosecuting terrorist acts/religious war. Whether or not he fits into the particular profile we've concocted of an IS attack seems rather immaterial.

BoatMad

boege wrote: »

With views like that, why stop there. Haters gotta hate!

Tried to have a sensible discussion but then this is after hours. My mistake.

Good day!

I dont hate muslims, not at all. ( just back from the Blue Mosque)

I am merely stating that actions will be taken to preserve the values of European society and its citizenry desire to live in they country not plagued by random acts of such terrorism

As the citizenry radicalises in response to such attacks, then actions that would not be normally considered become considered and then acted upon

That process is already underway in Europe, every day we have more calls for action.

as I said , internment is one solution , the US implemented in WW2 with little concern from the general citizenry about the US citizens that were interned

why ?, because war radicalises people

as for haters hate , are you aged 10 ? ,

BoatMad

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

Not quite, I'm suggesting we have a pretty unique problem with our Muslim population if the depressive/disconnected tendencies that exist across society are going to be routinely employed in prosecuting terrorist acts/religious war. Whether or not he fits into the particular profile we've concocted of an IS attack seems rather immaterial.

any people are depressive , they dont drive a semi through a crowd

lets not get side tracked here , this action was clearly as a result of the world wide call by Jihadists to strike against western citizenry , the precise means and how it was enacted and by whom are of little consequence in the bigger picture

CMOTDibbler

BoatMad wrote: »

any people are depressive , they dont drive a semi through a crowd

lets not get side tracked here , this action was clearly as a result of the world wide call by Jihadists to strike against western citizenry , the precise means and how it was enacted and by whom are of little consequence in the bigger picture

Many people with mental illnesses have killed other people. How many mass shootings in the US were perpetrated by marginalised and unstable people?

To say that this was 'clearly' a result of an IS call to arms is a massive overstatement. You might have decided that it is, you might even be right. But at this point it is certainly not clear.

BoatMad

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

Many people with mental illnesses have killed other people. How many mass shootings in the US were perpetrated by marginalised and unstable people?

To say that this was 'clearly' a result of an IS call to arms is a massive overstatement. You might have decided that it is, you might even be right. But at this point it is certainly not clear.

unless you are deliberately trying to look the other way , if it floats and its quacks, its a duck.

Im not arguing , where it is or it isn't, the vast majority of french and other citizens have equated this to other acts of Muslim extremist terror.

Thats all thats necessary, what " intellectuals" think is meaningless

the next step is then civil repression of the Muslim community in one form or another

Its coming

CMOTDibbler

BoatMad wrote: »

unless you are deliberately trying to look the other way , if it floats and its quacks, its a duck.

Im not arguing , where it is or it isn't, the vast majority of french and other citizens have equated this to other acts of Muslim extremist terror.

Thats all thats necessary, what " intellectuals" think is meaningless

the next step is then civil repression of the Muslim community in one form or another

Its coming

What actually is the reason is what matters. If it's IS recruitment then their ability to radicalise someone so quickly (and this has been said by the interior Minister) then governments will have to come up with some way of preventing that.

The danger is in knee jerk reactions that could have the opposite effect.

jackofalltrades

Shenshen wrote: »

I am - a lot more than some in this thread, I'm starting to think.
But all religions share the issues you raised. Every last single one. Yet Christianity doesn't embrace terrorism and (for the most part) violence any more, while others do. And interestingly, during the time Christianty was at its most violent, other religions didn't have issues with terror and bloodshed from within their ranks.

Christianity has and still uses violence to achieve it's aims.
Our recent history in Ireland shows us this.
As does the "kill the gays" law implemented in Uganda recently, they haven't turned away from violence.
They have less need for it as a tool, due to the power that they have in some societies.

Add to that that while a lot of terrorism in the past and today cloaked itself in religion, a lot of terrorism didn't and doesn't. The excuse for terrorism can be anything - from black civil rights to nationalism, from women's rights to any given religion. And at any given time any one of these issues will draw more supporters with a willingness to kill. Right now, that's Islam. In 20 years? Who knows what it'll be.

So the question now is do we want to try and find a solution to end terrorism - in which case just staring transfixedly at a particular religion is probably not going to give us any new ideas or help us along in any way, or do we just want to hate people following a religion we don't?

If I've read your argument correctly you seem to want to tackle people who could possibly resort to violence for a cause.
How do you think this could possibly be achieved? I think that could be very difficult.

That said addressing issues with regards to one religion that seems to be causing much of the violence would be a lot easier.

BoatMad

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

What actually is the reason is what matters. If it's IS recruitment then their ability to radicalise someone so quickly (and this has been said by the interior Minister) then governments will have to come up with some way of preventing that.

The danger is in knee jerk reactions that could have the opposite effect.

knee jerk reactions occur because citizenry get frightened , European history is full of it . Recent US actions in Afghanistan etc were a direct result of " knee -jerk" responses


its coming.

it's IS recruitment then their ability to radicalise someone so quickly (and this has been said by the interior Minister) then governments will have to come up with some way of preventing that.

partly correct, you must have a receptive audience as well

Hence the solution of selective internment , the problem is not conducive to being solved by conventional constitutional means

mdfire

Spent last weekend in Nice, only returning home Monday night. One of the coolest places Ive ever been to. Absolutely beautiful, really friendly people and the atmosphere there on Sunday evening was fantastic (up until Portugal scored). Cant really comprehend what has happened or what we in the West can do about it. I thought Brexit was one of the dumbest things ever but now closing of borders is appealing...along with rounding up and deporting all suspected lunatics. Either integrate and obey the laws of the land you are living in for Fxxk off back to the countries where this type of behaviour is acceptable.

Billy86

BoatMad wrote: »

in my view Internment is now the only option, the US did it in WW2

As in for all Muslims in Europe, or did I misread this entirely?

BoatMad

Billy86 wrote: »

As in for all Muslims in Europe, or did I misread this entirely?

I think you can start selectively based on available intelligence , targeting radical clerics, and their audiences etc

its only a suggestion , but there are very few options open to countries that need to stop these atrocities fast

as I said is was used in the US and elsewhere to some short term effect, the US detained 120,000 US citizens of Japanese origin