How many more attacks before the West has to consider the previously unthinkable?

The BBQ Pit
121

Everyone does realize, I hope, that that many of the “ISIS” attacks in France and the US are the equivalent of WorldStar videos, right?

These folks are just angry, evil douchebags who yell “worldstar” before they commit their acts to get some level of fame and recognition in a life which is bereft of meaning because they are so fucking pathetic.

It is horrific what they do, and I am saddened by it, but they are not representative of a religion, they are just internet attention whores who are sociopathic.

122

No reason they should have it though.

123

Nobody here said they should.

124

You’re very sure of yourself, aren’t you. Now who does that remind me of.

125

What a strange remark.

Greece and Turkey mutually kicked out nearly all of their Muslims and Christians, respectively, in the 1920s. Poland and the Soviet Union (in Kaliningrad) kicked out the Germans of East Prussia in 1945, though that was on ethnic rather than religious grounds. Middle Eastern countries mostly deported their Jewish populations in the 1950s and 1960s. Those situations generally worked out fine, and both Greece and Turkey today (for example) are probably a lot better off than they would be if they had significant Christian and Muslim minorities within their boundaries. Why would you automatically jump to the most ‘awful’ possible examples?

“Cuius regio, eius religio” isn’t a perfect principle to live by, and it has costs and benefits just as freedom of religion does, but in many situations “cuius regio, eius religio” might be a better alternative. It’s my hope that Europe discovers this sooner rather than later, and partitions itself between regions that want to be a multicultural dystopia, and regions that want to maintain their traditional ethnic and religious identity.

126

So the christian God is not the God of Abraham? Thus all rules from the old testament are invalid and Jesus was just lying when he talked about the old rules…
You know what, forget it. You already have this entire debate planned out in your head and you have won… in your own mind.

127

So, you continue to demonstrate your ignorance. Clerics declaring fatwas against violence or terrorism are actual efforts within the community to oppose the radicals.
Efforts (that you dismissed) to use social media to prevent recruiting are serious efforts to dry up the source of new members.
What do you think that a march in the street is actually going to accomplish, (besides giving whiners excuses to downplay such efforts), the way that you did with the passages you ignored from the linked stories:

So, first you whine that the moderate Muslims are not protesting, then you dismiss the reports that they are protesting.
Typical.

128

Ahh! You belong to one of the Christian sects that follow Marcion in trying to claim–against the overwhelming majority of Christians–that the Jewish God is different than the Christian God.
The vast majority of Christians view the Trinity as a different understanding of the Jewish God, not as someone different. And, since the God of Islam is the God of Abraham, those religions view them as the same God. Your minority view is hardly a point on which to base a discussion.
As to calling the God of Islam a demon, that is pure Marcionism. Irenaeus would be so disappointed in you.

129

It’s generally the ignorant that resort to personal attacks. That aside, I am sure that the families of the dead in Nice, Paris, Orlando, San Bernardino, etc, will be glad to know that clerics signed some documents last year that disavowed support of those that kill in the name of Allah. What a relief.

130

Wow, that was a good catch! Yes, I am largely (not entirely, but mostly) with Marcion there. (I’ve read Tertullian’s ‘refutation’ of Marcion, not Irenaeus though). It is certainly a minority viewpoint (though one revived by the Bogomils and Albigensians in the high middle ages) but since when did truth, scientific or theological, rest on a matter of majority vote?

I can only speak for myself, but I don’t think that the God who became incarnate in Jesus Christ was the same being as the Muslim god. To start with, because the Muslim god is unitary, not Trinitarian. And there are other reasons beyond that.

131

I don’t know what sect or denomination you were raised in, but I was raised Catholic, and we were never told anything like that. If you worship the God of Abraham, it follows that the Jews and Muslims worship the same god.

132

Allah created Adam and Ewa, sent the flood to Noah, tested Abraham by asking for the sacrifice of Isaac, inspired the prophets including Jeremiah and Ezekiel, and inspired the prophet Jesus.

Yes, the same God.

133

Isn’t the Muslim interpretation that God asked Abraham to sacrifice Ishmael? Still the same deity, though.

134

Not that this killer would know, him not being religious an’ all.

135

[QUOTE=SlackerInc]
Maybe you’re foursquare against this, and would argue that actuarially, this is still pretty low on the list of causes of death. Harris argues that this is a canard in some ways, but let’s leave that aside and ask this: how high would the death toll have to be before a different policy would seem acceptable, if not mandatory? I want to go into thought experiment territory here.

Presumably, if every Muslim in France attacked non-Muslim innocents at some point (not all at once, but biding their time until they had a good opportunity), that’s a no-brainer. Right? Or do we stand firm on religious freedom and civil liberties (opposing “thought crime”) even then?

Assuming that would indeed be high enough for drastic measures to be taken, what if it’s “only” a third of Muslims? Let’s say the other two-thirds were absolutely horrified by what that one-third was doing–not only for moral reasons but because they would obviously feel that the minority was ruining the majority’s standing in the society. I would submit that this is still well above the threshold where it’s an untenable situation. In a country of 64 million, 10% of whom are Muslims, how can you live with two million people who are going to try to kill you, even if the other four million are totally good eggs?
[/QUOTE]

Why ever bother with radical policies that try to impart preemptive judgment on 10% of your population, when the actual trigger-men responsible for the crimes have saved us the time/costs of trials and given themselves the death penalty?

If our better selves know it is best to judge everyone on a case by case basis, and not generalize groups from the actions of its individuals; then how can we worry or be up-in-arms over the fact that suicide bombing is a tactic that sorts itself out. The criminal kills X amount of people, and summarily gets the death penalty from his own actions. Case closed.

It would be like worrying over the increase in petty street theft if after the criminal stole your wallet, he gave you the title and keys to his expensive car. Justice has been served. The perpetrator has already paid back his debt.

So far from the news all I hear about is how all these terrorists have died, either by their own actions, or from being stopped by police. Maybe some have actually been taken into custody, but they will just get a trial that will sentence them to life in prison anyway. Why worry about a group of criminals who have so far been unable to become “serial killers,” as their first crime is also their last? As a “criminal class” Islamic terrorists seem uniquely inept at escaping justice.

I do not see the point in curtailing the civil liberties of innocents just to stop a criminal organization that, almost by definition, kills off its own members as soon as their “thought crimes” become real crimes.

136

Because the suicide attackers kill many in the process.
On 9/11, nineteen hijackers died, but they killed nearly 3,000 in the process. 3,000 for 19 isn’t a good trade.

At Nice, one attacker died, but killed 84 in the process. 84 for 1 isn’t a good trade.
To reverse your analogy, it’s akin to if after a criminal stole your expensive car, he then gave you his wallet which contains a few dollars.

137

I realize that you are invested in your Communist apologia and your extreme religious bigotries and hatreds.

Oh wonderful, another reason for you to make excuse and laud the Stalinist systems (of course you try to disguise it in ambigous statements, but I have seen enough)

He isn’t and he is an apologist for the Stalinists, there is no moral compass here from someone who tries to promote that the loss of the Soviet Union was ‘bad.’

138

Hmm, I see your point Velocity. May I further refine the analogy? It is like a large amount of elderly getting phished over the phone, their bank accounts drained. The person responsible is put to trial and he gets jail and all of his assets liquidated and re-dispersed to his victims as some semblance of restitution. Unfortunately, it was not enough to balance the scales; it could never really be enough, even though the criminal was forced to give everything that he had.

But what is the alternative to this unsatisfying outcome of a criminal not being able to fully pay back what society is owed? Should society demand its “pound of flesh” from the liquidated assets of a criminal’s friends/family/community? That might make some think twice, yet afterwards others would see they have nothing left to lose.

Contrariwise, leaving the family/etc untouched would just allow that environment to breed new criminals. Maybe all we need is expanded surveillance: police on every corner, bugs in all our homes, no more anonymity on the internet. Everything monitored so at the first hints of radicalization the government can swoop in and save us from ourselves.

Going beyond the dooer-of-the-deed and terrorizing the family and local community into becoming snitches for the national “good,” is something that the USSR or China would do. Is our fear of being blown up really so great that we would rather a jackboot stomp on our faces forever?

Or maybe we can live more-or-less than we are now in relative freedom without sacrificing our morals by wrapping up the innocent majority into a witch hunt; and accept that every once in a while another 9/11 will happen and the world’s birthrate will be statistically 0 for a whole 25 minutes while the population normalizes again.
http://www.ecology.com/birth-death-rates/

139

I think you’ve moved those goalposts so many times they’re practically in the bleachers.

140

Unfortunately, it’s not a game. It’s for real.