• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Terror attack in Nice

Trausti said:
France before the mass importation of Muslims - no terror attacks.
None?
Organisation de l'armée secrète wasn't a terrorist organization, why?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organisation_de_l'armée_secrète

wiki said:
By acts of bombings and targetted assassinations in both metropolitan France and French Algerian territories, which are estimated to have resulted in 2,000 deaths between April 1961 and April 1962, the OAS attempted to prevent Algerian independence. This campaign culminated in a wave of attacks that followed the March 1962 Evian agreements, which granted independence to Algeria and marked the beginning of the exodus of the pieds-noirs, and in Jean-Marie Bastien-Thiry's 1962 assassination attempt against president de Gaulle in the Paris suburb of Le Petit-Clamart. Another prominent target was the existentialist philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre, who supported the FLN.
 
Islam has nothing to do with Islam.

What's up with that saying anyway? I assumed from the start (when I saw it in one of those picture sayings) that it was some attempt at humor or ridicule.

Does someone actually believe that saying is true? The statement is clearly false. Things, be them what they may, are if nothing else, the very things they are. Islam has something (not nothing, but something) to do with Islam, as Islam is Islam (after all, what else could something be if not the very thing it is?), and if something is itself, then surely one has something to do with itself, as it is itself.
 
Organisation de l'armée secrète wasn't a terrorist organization, why?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organisation_de_l'armée_secrète

wiki said:
By acts of bombings and targetted assassinations in both metropolitan France and French Algerian territories, which are estimated to have resulted in 2,000 deaths between April 1961 and April 1962, the OAS attempted to prevent Algerian independence. This campaign culminated in a wave of attacks that followed the March 1962 Evian agreements, which granted independence to Algeria and marked the beginning of the exodus of the pieds-noirs, and in Jean-Marie Bastien-Thiry's 1962 assassination attempt against president de Gaulle in the Paris suburb of Le Petit-Clamart. Another prominent target was the existentialist philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre, who supported the FLN.

You can't count the OAS as terrorist as they are not Muslim. I'm not sure if it still exists unofficially or other splinters have been formed but they did go on the rampage in 1962. Here is an extract.

March 1962 Evian agreements and the struggle of the OAS[edit]
See also: Battle of Bab El Oued
The main hope of the OAS was to prove that the FLN was secretly restarting military action after a ceasefire was agreed in the Evian agreements of 19 March 1962 and the referendum of June 1962; So, during these three months, the OAS unleashed a new terrorist campaign to force the FLN to abandon the ceasefire. Over 100 bombs a day were detonated by the OAS in March in pursuit of this goal. OAS operatives set off an average of 120 bombs per day in March, with targets including hospitals and schools. Dozens of Arab residents were killed at Place du Gouvernement when 24 mortar rounds were fired from the European stronghold of Bab el-Oued.[9] On 21 March, the OAS issued a flyer where they proclaimed that the French military had become an "occupation force."[6] It organized car bombings: 25 killed in Oran on 28 February 1962 and 62 killed in Algiers on 2 May, among others.[6] On 22 March, they took control of Bab el-Oued and attacked French soldiers, killing six of them. The French military then surrounded them and stormed the neighbourhood. The battle killed 35 and injured 150.[6] On 26 March, the leaders of the OAS proclaimed a general strike in Algiers and called for the European settlers to come to Bab el-Oued in order to break the blockade by military forces loyal to de Gaulle and the Republic. A detachment of tirailleurs (Muslim troops in the French Army) fired on the demonstrators, killing 54, injuring 140, and traumatising the settlers' population in what is known as the "gunfight of the Rue d'Isly".[6] In coincidence with the uprising of Bab-el Oued, 200 OAS maquis marched from Algiers to Ouarsenis, a mountainous region between Oran and Algiers. They tried to overrun two French military outposts and gain support for local Muslim tribes loyal to France, but instead they were harassed and eventually defeated by Legion units led by Colonel Albert Brothier after several days of fighting.[10] Some clashes between the French army and the OAS involving grenades and mortar fire took place at Oran as late as 10 April.[11] At least one Lieutenant and one Sub-Lieutenant were killed by the OAS during the fighting.[12]
END OF QUOTE
 
These acts are being perpetrated by psychopathic assholes. Many who have been inspired by a scientology like, terrible fan-fiction sect of Islam.

I don't think it's necessarily true that people who do acts like this are psychopaths. For you or me to do something like would indeed most likely indicate a severe psychotic episode, but for them, the decision to take out as many unsuspecting, unthreatening, non-dangerous people as possible (kids included) is a rational decision decision made with lots of deliberation.

The idea of martyrdom is a cultural phenomenon that exists in all societies. In the U.S. our soldiers are patriotic martyrs. To some, cops who die in the line of duty are martyrs. We just don't use that word for it. We call them "heroes." And in certain, significant circles of Islam, martyrdom/heroism consists of what happened in Nice yesterday. And if that is the case, then mental illness can't be used as an excuse.

I tend to think that approaching it from an angle that refuses to hold the religion itself responsible ignores a large part of the reality. And that reality is that what we call terrorism is something that Islam considers acts of heroism. What's the answer? Fuck if I know. Eternal vigilance?

But there is another question: what is France going to do? Surely the French cannot sit idly by and and simply say that not all Muslims are bad so nothing can be done. And that's the problem. Something has to be done. Somewhere there were Muslims who took no part in this latest attack, knew it was going to happen, yet said nothing. And it's those people who need to be convinced that this is not acceptable. Easier said than done though.
 
So this is a case of "wife leaves the guy, the guy gets depressed and go church mosque and "good" people there explain meaning of life to him"
ISIS really perfected their "lets recruit some weirdo" scheme.
If I was in french counter-terrorism I would have started massive recruitments of weirdos myself for sting operations.
 
I tend to think that approaching it from an angle that refuses to hold the religion itself responsible ignores a large part of the reality.
I work with a Muslim. He hasn't blown anything up in the nearly two decades I've worked with him. He thinks these acts are absurd and fly in the face of Islam.
And that reality is that what we call terrorism is something that Islam considers acts of heroism. What's the answer? Fuck if I know. Eternal vigilance?
Heroism? While that could be perceived with say the Algerians trying to free themselves from French rule, ISIS are not heroes. They are an Armageddon cult that wants the planet to burn.

The answer is stop making things worse! The Western world has dug a deep hole with the Middle East. And thanks to the Soviets and Americans, there are lots of weapons available to terror groups. Stop giving them weapons, stop making their propaganda easier and easier. It isn't going to stop over night. And it should be remembered, shit was worse, much worse. We need perspective and to proceed rationally.

But there is another question: what is France going to do? Surely the French cannot sit idly by and and simply say that not all Muslims are bad so nothing can be done. And that's the problem. Something has to be done. Somewhere there were Muslims who took no part in this latest attack, knew it was going to happen, yet said nothing. And it's those people who need to be convinced that this is not acceptable. Easier said than done though.
France will do what they have been doing. Using intelligence to try and prevent these attacks. The problem is, blunt single person attacks may be near impossible to prevent.

Oh and wage the war against terrorism online, where the propaganda is the strongest.
 
Buddhists are not bombing, shooting up people or driving trucks through crowds for their religion on an almost daily basis.

Nor are the vast, overwhelming majority of Muslims, be they in France or wherever else, who are just living their lives like anyone else.

Anyone who attempts to in any way assign blame to them for these acts, or advocates treating them differently as a result, is indeed a fucking bigot and deserves to be called such at every juncture.
 
These acts are being perpetrated by psychopathic assholes. Many who have been inspired by a scientology like, terrible fan-fiction sect of Islam.

I don't think it's necessarily true that people who do acts like this are psychopaths. For you or me to do something like would indeed most likely indicate a severe psychotic episode, but for them, the decision to take out as many unsuspecting, unthreatening, non-dangerous people as possible (kids included) is a rational decision decision made with lots of deliberation.

The idea of martyrdom is a cultural phenomenon that exists in all societies. In the U.S. our soldiers are patriotic martyrs. To some, cops who die in the line of duty are martyrs. We just don't use that word for it. We call them "heroes." And in certain, significant circles of Islam, martyrdom/heroism consists of what happened in Nice yesterday. And if that is the case, then mental illness can't be used as an excuse.

I tend to think that approaching it from an angle that refuses to hold the religion itself responsible ignores a large part of the reality. And that reality is that what we call terrorism is something that Islam considers acts of heroism. What's the answer? Fuck if I know. Eternal vigilance?

But there is another question: what is France going to do? Surely the French cannot sit idly by and and simply say that not all Muslims are bad so nothing can be done. And that's the problem. Something has to be done. Somewhere there were Muslims who took no part in this latest attack, knew it was going to happen, yet said nothing. And it's those people who need to be convinced that this is not acceptable. Easier said than done though.

All of that can be said about any criminal behavior, though. If there are people who shelter criminals from justice for any reason, be it religious or familial or whatever, they are complicit in the crime and should be prosecuted. We (as in the West) already have systems in place to deal with these kinds of scenarios. I agree that the perpetrator may not have been psychotic as such, but religion is just one of many reasons why people kill each other. I don't know that it warrants a special "something" that must be done beyond the normal routine for criminal acts.
 
So this is a case of "wife leaves the guy, the guy gets depressed and go church mosque and "good" people there explain meaning of life to him"
ISIS really perfected their "lets recruit some weirdo" scheme.
If I was in french counter-terrorism I would have started massive recruitments of weirdos myself for sting operations.

There is noting mentioned about him going to the mosque. It seems so far to be a lone lunatic with a criminal record of violence, but no links to terrorist organisations. The mechanics of a criminals, mind and a terrorists is similar in that the criminal and terrorist tend to claim their actions had a good cause.

As I understand, however the police are questioning his estranged wife about possible links he may have had to terrorist organisations.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...river-who-killed-84-on-french-riviera-was-cr/
2:17PM

Attacker's estranged wife in police custody being questioned about his Islamist links

Mohamed Lahouaiej Bouhlel's estranged wife is in police custody, reports David Chazan.

Officers are questioning her about the Nice attacker's alleged Islamist links.

The 31-year-old truck driver was not on a terrorist watch list or suspected of being security threat, it has been reported.
 
There is noting mentioned about him going to the mosque. It seems so far to be a lone lunatic with a criminal record of violence, but no links to terrorist organisations. The mechanics of a criminals, mind and a terrorists is similar in that the criminal and terrorist tend to claim their actions had a good cause.
Well, they say he had a load of weapons in his truck. So it's reasonable to assume he had some assistance. So lunatic but not lone.
 
There is noting mentioned about him going to the mosque. It seems so far to be a lone lunatic with a criminal record of violence, but no links to terrorist organisations. The mechanics of a criminals, mind and a terrorists is similar in that the criminal and terrorist tend to claim their actions had a good cause.
Well, they say he had a load of weapons in his truck. So it's reasonable to assume he had some assistance. So lunatic but not lone.

They are now saying those were fake.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/15/europe/nice-france-truck/index.html
Authorities found several fake rifles and fake grenades inside the truck, according to BFM-TV reporter Cecile Ollivier. A 7.65 caliber handgun was found on the attacker who was known to authorities for weapons possession crimes, but nothing terror related, according to Ollivier.
 
Well, they say he had a load of weapons in his truck. So it's reasonable to assume he had some assistance. So lunatic but not lone.

They are now saying those were fake.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/15/europe/nice-france-truck/index.html
Authorities found several fake rifles and fake grenades inside the truck, according to BFM-TV reporter Cecile Ollivier. A 7.65 caliber handgun was found on the attacker who was known to authorities for weapons possession crimes, but nothing terror related, according to Ollivier.
Fake weapons? That's pretty weird. In that case he could be lone lunatic.
 
There is noting mentioned about him going to the mosque. It seems so far to be a lone lunatic with a criminal record of violence, but no links to terrorist organisations. The mechanics of a criminals, mind and a terrorists is similar in that the criminal and terrorist tend to claim their actions had a good cause.
Well, they say he had a load of weapons in his truck. So it's reasonable to assume he had some assistance. So lunatic but not lone.

This is under investigation, though this in itself would be insufficient to suggest conspiracy with others. Weapons are relatively easy to ship around the EU though its parliament recently voted to increase security. He could have purchased it from a suppliers who deals with bank robbers, or a terrorist cell. Either way the buyers generally give out as little as possible about their identities.

Meanwhile the ultra-right groups, notably in Austria and France will no doubt capitalize on this to be possible become the largest single party. (Having said that, the National Front in France now seeks support from moderate Muslims).
 
I work with a Muslim. He hasn't blown anything up in the nearly two decades I've worked with him. He thinks these acts are absurd and fly in the face of Islam.

I notice you didn't say you work with a True Muslim :cheeky:
 
Nor are the vast, overwhelming majority of Muslims, be they in France or wherever else, who are just living their lives like anyone else.
overwhelming is not good enough.

If the overwhelming number of Muslims were terrorists, then as Reagan said, "You ain't seen nothing yet." This was done by one person in a truck, and which was planned. It is not clear at this point if he had accomplices and or was part of a terrorist plan.

- - - Updated - - -

Nor are the vast, overwhelming majority of Muslims, be they in France or wherever else, who are just living their lives like anyone else.
overwhelming is not good enough.

If the overwhelming number of Muslims were terrorists, then as Reagan said, "You ain't seen nothing yet." This was done by one person in a truck, and which was planned. It is not clear at this point if he had accomplices and or was part of a terrorist plan.
 
Back
Top Bottom