I'm so confused, isn't the point of terror attack to die (e.g.suicide bombs) so that you go to heaven beacuse you died for your god?
Talk about senseless killings, my heart goes out to them.
Comment has been collapsed.
The only point for these terrorists is to terrorize, make headlines and make people scared to live the life's they want to.
Comment has been collapsed.
+1 I'm from Barcelona, and I work here. Ppl came crazy yesterday asking to all their families and friends to see if they are fine.
Comment has been collapsed.
I hope that you and your family are safe and that the wounded people get the best treatment possible. I hear that there's a lot of tourists under the victims including a Belgian woman, mother of two, that was murdered during this cowardly terrorist attack. Several Belgians are amongst the wounded too.
No tinc por!
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes, luckily we are all ok. The fact is that seems that the 90% of the ppl were tourist from a 34 diferent nationalities as the last news I had.
there were 3 attacks/ phases:
1.- Explosion on Alcanar. A flat with 20-30 gas bottles which intention was to be on the van but they exploded the night before (the terrorist did something wrong). 1 person died. 5-6 ppl injured.
2.- the van attack. 13 dead, 80-100 injured.. 15 of them really bad.
2.1.- a focus car tries to scape injuring a police. Police kills the driver and found another person dead by knife on the back of the car. Dunno who is.
3.- cambrils. A terrorist car strikes some ppl on road, and turn over (also heard they hit a police car). The 5 terrorists go out and start to stab ppl around. 1-2ppl dead.. some more injured. Police kill 4 and the 5th died lately because of injurys.
As you can see, there has been so many attempts on the last 24h. (sorry for my bad english)
Comment has been collapsed.
I also just heard that the murdered and wounded victims have 34 different nationalities and that the driver of the van is 17 years old...
I think it's gonna get a lot worse in Europe as daesh is losing ground in Syria and Iraq, there will be more terror attacks on European soil to distract the focus from daesh losing ground in it's califate and everyone can get hold of knives, a car, van or truck to use them as terror weapons for their radical Islamic terror.
Please don't say sorry because your English is good. Also I'm living in the Flandes part of Belgium and we have a cultural and political connection with Catalunya and it's people.
Comment has been collapsed.
Fucking psychos, my thoughts are with the families of the victims and the good people of Barcelona (me alegro que estés bien tú y los tuyos).
Stand your ground, show them you won't be intimidated! And may the authorities get a lot of info from the captured assholes.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yup, terrorists are there to terrorize. It's all in the name really.
Oh and fairly sure lots of them believe they will go to heaven if they kill infidels (people who don't believe in the same stuff they do) but there's generally no obligation for them to die at the same time to get to heaven. So if they live through it and spend the rest of their lives in a cell, they're still expecting to go to heaven when they die of old age.
Comment has been collapsed.
If there are any survivors amongst the terrorists then I really hope there's somewhere In Europe an European counterpart of Gitmo where they can work these terrorists over to gain information.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well I suppose if you consider Gitmo a success then you'd want some more such places... Other than that people will tell you whatever you want to hear under duress, and could tell you things you'd never even think of asking if you convince them that values of tolerance are better for everyone it would really just provide yet another propaganda tool for terrorists, more proof that westerners need to be hit and run. And if we could actually make them scared of surviving their attack that would probably mean they'd feel a need to pack their vehicular weapon of choice full of explosives. So then even if you only get a little maimed by their car you might get engulfed by their fireball.
Comment has been collapsed.
Actually their intention was to put gas bottles in a van to cause an explosion and fireball, see this post.
I don't have any problems if the interrogation of terrorists is somewhat interesting. There's no reason to be humane with inhumane people (be they radical Islamic Daesh or white (neo) nazis) like these terrorists and if there's a change to stop other terror attacks while working them over I say go for it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah I'd heard about that, seems to me like it wasn't a crucial part of their operation though given that they didn't postpone it after that mishap. I'd consider those affected by this Barcelona attack quite fortunate that part of the plan blew up in the faces of the terrorists (pun intended). I believe it would be worse if all the terrorists who use their vehicles as weapons insisted on packing it full of bombs too.
The problem is not so much in how you treat one person, after all they are rendered harmless in captivity no matter how you treat them. It's more to do with what it may do to other people who previously partially agreed with the torturee's views, it reinforces a very negative view and may help convince them to take up vehicles (or arms) against you.
I can't imagine racial tension or any possible future racially motivated attacks in the US would be less likely if they tortured that Fields guy from the Charlottesville incident to see what he knows, which I suspect is not much anyway.
Many terrorists don't know anything useful. Daesh has been a big proponent of so called lone wolf attacks, whereby people who sympathise with them plan out and execute their own attacks. They often don't really have anything useful to tell, it's not like they ever get to meet other lone wolves (or else they would be not-so-lonely wolves), the best they can do if tortured is try to make up realistic sounding stories so you stop torturing them, which isn't very useful (and even quite problematic if you can't tell for sure what's true and what isn't).
Besides, it kills any chance of getting useful information out of any terrorist who may actually know something useful and would be willing to give it up if you treat them nicely.
Even ignoring all those who ended up in Gitmo by mistake and all the embarrassment it's caused the US, I don't think Europeans would be anything other than worse off if they had their own Gitmo.
Comment has been collapsed.
And you then also better hope our retarded political leaders don't vote retarded laws that allows for the retarded police to come and arrest you without evidence, the old "bag 'em and grab 'em" trick. It happened in the past, thinking "it only happens to others" would be silly.
Don't get me wrong, I think we should use any means we can to stop terrorists, and there are solutions ranging from offensive hacking (short term strategy) to prevention by education (very long term) and everything in between, I just don't think creating secret prisons should be on top of our list of solutions, we may have a lot more to loose than expected.
Comment has been collapsed.
I actually have a lot of respect for the police here, while there have been terror attacks I can't but wonder what would have happened if there was no police around or if the police were chained by liberal rules that give the terrorists the proverbial benefit of the doubt. How many attacks were foiled while using infiltrators and undercover\secret police?
These terrorists aren't choir boys that you can stop with a please don't do this again...
Police need special laws and intervention groups against these radicals. I'm from Belgium and now there's a trial busy of two radical Islamic terrorists (a third one got his head popped by a police sniper) that when the police entered their apartment they (the daesh terrorists) immediately shot at the police with automatic 7.62mm AK-47's and threw grenades. Against such terror you need special police units and laws.
Comment has been collapsed.
I actually have a lot of respect for the police here
I have none. And way more reasons for that than I wish for.
what would have happened if there was no police around
We can invert the question (which would be best, no police is a silly idea) : what would have happened if there was better police ? I know for a fact their IT infrastructure is laughable, out of sheer incompetence in the matter, which causes obvious issues in the handling on the critical information. They're not trying to hire to fix that either. France is no better, and I can only assume the other European states share the same weaknesses.
And then there's the issue of overall effectiveness : I had to cross the border the day after the attacks in Brussels, and despite hearing on TV that there were heavy controls, I saw no car being stopped that day, in either way. They'll shout and scream for more means being granted to the police force, but what is being done with what they have right now is sub-par, to say the least, so I fail to see how more means would bring more results, my assumption is that it would only increase the running costs.
To be clear, I think we would avoid a LOT more attacks having better cops than by having richer cops or more of the same.
Police need special laws and intervention groups against these radicals.
My point is that you need to be careful what you wish for. Such laws are usually putting your human rights and your privacy on the side, which I'm definitely not ok with, in fact I'm pretty sure disrupting our way of life by forcing us to implement such extreme measures out of emotional response is one of the terrorists's objectives. They want you to be scared/angry to the point where you abandon your civilized manners and careful consideration in favor of rushed decision making and internal issues within our society.
Besides, who's to say those "special laws" will serve their purpose and not be misused, as the past has shown they were. There are many examples of critics of the Patriot Act, states of emergency in our countries (especially in France) and their effectiveness/running cost ratios, etc ... It's easy to start saying things like "let's burn 'em all", "why are we paying to feed them in jail", etc, but the risk of that backfiring is too great IMHO.
Comment has been collapsed.
Having different opinions isn't a bad thing and it's diversity. Changed times need changed law enforcement and laws, as of now we need soldiers and police not only to safe our life's but also our way of life.
I'm living In Belgium and there, alone, are nearly 700 radicalized Islamic nutters that went of and gone to Syria and Iraq to join and fight\murder for daesh. Of these a third returned most probably as worser religious nutters than they were before, with the mentality of killing persons as a way of life and instructed in the use of weapons and explosives. And having the knowledge of terror tactics. This is the very same as in most other European countries and countries around the world. There's free passage now in Europe for persons and goods. So if nothing is done my country and Europe would turn into a terrorist daesh playground.
In Belgium police did get more tools to combat these daesh terrorists but they aren't unlimited and within a time frame.
Comment has been collapsed.
they aren't unlimited and within a time frame
Which is a good thing IMHO, unlimited power too often leads to abuse of it. I'm also worried about returnees, maybe we do need more cops to keep tabs on those bags of poop when they come back, but I can't help being worried when for example I'm seeing reports of severe information exchange failings between different law enforcement agencies and at the same time, no job offers looking for trained people that can help with building an appropriate system or improve the existing. I want to see better tools for information management and even an offensive cyberattack team to disrupt daesh's recruitment efforts and communication, spy on them and even steal their funds. I know we can be more clever than the terrorists are, and we can use that to effectively stop them. Hell, if something like that is created, they would receive my CV the same day.
I'm from Belgium as well, have my country's interests at heart, and obviously you do too. I'm really super happy you're not taking what I say in a wrong way, and that we can have a civil conversation about what is the best way to protect what we both love (our way of life), and fix the issue (those terrorists rats need to be flushed out). Belgians are so awesome ;-)
Comment has been collapsed.
They're killing for capitalistic reasons in the name of a dead god.
Comment has been collapsed.
terrorism is an act of terror, the term is not only used by islamistic radicals.
Comment has been collapsed.
Apologies i should have specified i was refering to the islamic radicals
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm so confused, isn't the point of terror attack to die (e.g.suicide bombs) so that you go to heaven beacuse you died for your god?
You may not be old enough to remember the "beginning" of terrorism in the 20th century. Although the term was coined by the French during the "Reign of Terror," it became known as a political tool by the end of the 19th century. The specific tactics of terrorism used vary greatly depending upon who is causing the terror and what they hope to achieve by it. Before groups like Hizbullaah, Hamas, and the Tamil Tigers became famous, other terrorist groups like the KKK and IRA held the spotlight.
Of course, that is only the "modern view" of terrorism. The tactics of attacking civilian populations in order to inspire fear go way, way, way back. Basically, those who have justified the murder of innocent people to achieve political ends by scaring the populace have been around for the majority of human history.
Comment has been collapsed.
Then you remember all the terrorism of the 70's and 80's. (And no, I'm not talking about the fashion industry.)
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, we can go much more back in the past.
During the WW2, people who were killing nazis were called terrorists by nazis.
As I'm French, I can take a much more older example.
During the French Revolution (XVIIIth cent.), those who were against that revolution were acting as terrorists to defend their beliefs.
But, all the countries had the same situation in its history, even the USA.
As wrote dLo, an act of terrorism can become an act of heroism, or the opposite, it depends who is ruling the country and writing the history books.
Comment has been collapsed.
This is very odd. You are responding to my post, yet your response would seem to indicate that you haven't actually read my post. Perhaps I am misunderstanding what you wrote?
Comment has been collapsed.
I think you forgot one key point - when the western nations convert from democracies to sharia law, these acts won't be remember as terrorism, but as acts of heroism.
Comment has been collapsed.
coincidently I'm actually planning on changing my surname in the near(ish) future because i want a more British sounding surname, but if we are adopting sharia law then maybe i shouldn't :P
Comment has been collapsed.
... these acts won't be remember as terrorism, but as acts of heroism.
No. Shariah Law strictly prohibits such acts. What recently happened in Spain broke at least six Islamic laws.
Terrorism is always done by those who are both ignorant and angry. People who know better and/or have more self-control don't do such things, regardless of their religion.
Comment has been collapsed.
Wow, someone who knows difference between islam and terrorism!
Comment has been collapsed.
I love it when American Christians tell people who live in the Middle East about Islam and Sharia.... because they know so much about it living under the US Constitution. I wish you islamadefenders would just shut the hell up already - you're ignorant. And if you practice some watered down version of Islam in the USA - you're basically practicing another religion - so again shut the hell up already.
Koran 2:193 Fight them [Kafirs] until there is no more discord and the religion of Allah reigns absolute
Sahih Muslim Book 001 Hadith 31 "Mohammed: “I have been ordered to wage war against mankind until they accept that there is no god but Allah and that they believe I am His prophet and accept all revelations spoken through me"
Sahih al-Bukhari Book 52 Hadith 196 "Mohammed: “I have been directed to fight the Kafirs until every one of them admits, ‘There is only one god and that is Allah."
You are just a Kafir who doesn't know anything about this. You are not a Muslim from the middle-east... and you live in a state of denial. There are plenty of people who moved from the middle east to the west and converted away from Islam and are now an apostate because they can see the lies... very brave men and women who - according to the Koran should be hunted down and killed wherever they are - are now speaking out about Islam and trying to educate you western idiots before you allow far left liberals from inviting the enemy in.
Jihadists are celebrated in Islam... it is absolutely in line with the word of the Mohammed and most certainly the wishes of Allah as written. Sharia, of course celebrates these terrorist actions... the death of Kafirs... the arrogant infidel's have allowed this war to be brought to their own door steps and then pretend there is no war.
Comment has been collapsed.
Jihadists are celebrated in Islam.
This one part is actually true. The term "Jihadist" is both inaccurate and misleading, but the general idea is sound.
You clearly have no idea who I am. For one thing, I was a student of Islamic Law while I was living in the Middle-East. For another, I actively avoid speaking about things of which I am ignorant, and I don't permit myself to lie. May God guide you. Aameen.
Comment has been collapsed.
And which middle-eastern nation did you supposedly study islamic law in?
Comment has been collapsed.
Shahid - dies in a process.
Inghimasi - might die, but not necessarily.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't know what those words are but they sound delicious.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes. They believe,that you can go to heaven when you kill persons who believes in other GOD.
Comment has been collapsed.
No, its only like that for goatfuckers. Either those guys were not one of them or they belonged to some other group of goatfuckers that doesnt do suicide attacks (think of it as of various units delegatged to use various stuff in rts xd)
Comment has been collapsed.
I doun't understand. Isis have claimed responsibilty and they do do suicide attacks right?
Comment has been collapsed.
Search around a bit, as I said they have various groups responsible for various things. There's plenty of info about their structure. Not every terrorist from them is a suicide bomber
Comment has been collapsed.
that sucks 😢
i wonder who did it and for what reason.
Comment has been collapsed.
My brother lives there but he and his friends are ok.
Comment has been collapsed.
Sorry to hear that. These terrorists are everywhere and killing innocent poor people. Sick of this...
Comment has been collapsed.
Should we blame Christianity for the priests that rape children? Or do we single them out as parasites?
I'm not a fan of Islam either, but those who perform terrorist attacks are simply criminals and probably insane. If you need religion to tell you what is good and bad, then you have a fundamental problem at your core, regardless of what religion you follow.
Anyone can kill in the name of Islam. Anyone can kill in the name of God. Anyone can kill in the name of anything. If you decided to become religious right now and chose Islam, does that force you to go on a murderous rampage?
And yeah, I question some of the Koran's texts aswell, just as I do the bible, but groups like ISIS are not simply members of a religion anymore.
Comment has been collapsed.
There is diffrence between Islam and Jihad. Those who do terrorist attacks are using Jihad "sacred war" which means they will die for Allah. At least that's i've heard few years ago, but still.
All religions are bullshit and makes only more trouble.
Comment has been collapsed.
Should we blame Christianity for the priests that rape children? Or do we single them out as parasites?
Nobody believes that killing is right (sane people only anyway), nor is raping anyone else. The problem is those people do it differently.
Have you ever seen those priests raping while shouting FOR JESUS!!!! ?
Or beheading and burning people alive while screaming ALLAHU AKBAR!!! ?
Which one?
I am not even accusing Islam, nor defending Christianity. I am merely stating a simple fact.
It's fundamentally different in modern era, the old Crusader has been long gone whereas ISIS and Boko Haram are right in front of us. No wonder people are being Islamophobia and never Christianphobia.
Comment has been collapsed.
to be fair i don't think anyone has physically seen the priest during those rape, they could have been shouting 'oh god!'
Not that i agree either way
Comment has been collapsed.
"Have you ever seen those priests raping while shouting FOR JESUS!!!! ?"
lol
Comment has been collapsed.
LOL priceless.
Anyway, fuck the jihadists. I agree that at its core the world's widespread religions are to promote spirituality and not incite killing... alas there are so many guides that promote hate and intolerance among them... like the fucking jihadists for one.
Comment has been collapsed.
And yet even in the modern age there are lingering aspects of the christian values that run counter to civilised mentality. It was only recently that homosexual marriage was "allowed" due to roadblocking anchored with their values, claiming ownership of 'marriage' even when there were churches willing to marry such couples.
The point is that even when a religion is domesticated, its roots remain the same. The tamed version of christianity has been around forever and yet we are still ironing out these kinds of wrinkles. Whether someone is proudly yelling about their misdeeds or doing them behind closed doors, it matters only that there is a repeating pattern. I mean, we STILL have 'conversion camps' for homosexuality, right here in 2017. It should also be considered that the child molestation thing was actively being covered, and we're also not talking ancient history with this. I had actually written here that it has gotten better over time, but a quick google to check whether that was my own blindness revealed that yes, it's still a big issue even up to this year. Apparently that whole closed rank garbage of "if you discover a pedophile in your midst, report to the pope not the police" is still a thing.
Like any domesticated animal, no matter how tame they get, never forget the underlying feral, y'know? While religion can be a binding force for good, that relies on the teachings being made more palatable by its adherents considering the more vulgar teachings as metaphorical or 'optional'. We have to remember that disregarding the parts that enable crimes or atrocity are always the decision of the individual, which we take for granted given we consider ourselves civilised, but forget that intelligence and moral fiber varies wildly. The era that the old religions were founded in are incompatible with the modern mentality. Yeah, most people totally get it and know how to make peace with themselves in the balance between faith and reality (and more power to them in finding strength in their respective spirituality), but there are those who do not. This is not exclusive to any religion.
Whether they yell their religious maladaption from the rooftops or stifle it cloak-and-dagger style behind closed doors is irrelevent, all that matters is that it continues to happen. I would be more willing to argue that a religious enemy that has a savage public image is easier to underline for its misdeeds (and subsequently raise awareness and further 'tame' the religion) than the one that creeps like a silent poison and can be forgotten while it continues to saturate. To-may-to / to-mah-to. In the end, we have to remember that these groups are large enough that we can't treat their constituants as members of a hivemind. Treat the criminals as criminals. Treat their active enablers and assistants as co-conspirators. And treat the others as any other citizen.
Comment has been collapsed.
islam is a religion of peace
I wonder who it was that first uttered this absurdity? It has caused more confusion among both Muslims and non-Muslims than anything else I can bring to mind.
Comment has been collapsed.
Religion is the opium of the people - and works both ways, obviously. Wouldn't it be nice if people would realize that if we'd focus more on the underlying issues that enable the ones to manipulate religions to fit their narrative (which is easily done due to their abstract and vague nature anyway) and to have that much success convincing others to do such heinous acts, we would effectively root out the source of most of terrorism? But hey, god forbid (ba-dum-tss), that'd probably be actually solution-oriented rather than beating the same dead horse over an over again.
Comment has been collapsed.
I think solution-oriented is the way to go. We run into difficulty when people refuse to implement solutions, though.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, I better start saving up some money for that ticket to Utopia - unfortunately :/.
Comment has been collapsed.
Utopia is still under construction, sadly.
I'm hedging my bets on a floating island, on which I plan to abduct all my buddies. The logistics are pretty tricky, but I think I can pull it off. If I can find a landmass hollow enough to house a few thousand cows underground, hopefully their collective emissions will be enough to float the island in the sky while providing enough food and fertiliser to sustain enough agriculture for our small populace. I mean, this is of course assuming we can genetically modify them to see in the dark and not be able to smell farts. A valve release system to use the gas to steer our island should be easy enough, and our collective poop reserves would make for a formidable military deterrent. Not exactly a powerful weapon but nobody wants to face a literal rain of... yeah. It'll be tricky to pull off, but think of how good the wifi signals must be up there?
I'm thinking of opening applications once we get the details hashed out.
So long as you don't mind belonging to a nerd collective on a literal fart island, shall I mark you down as potentially interested? :3c
Comment has been collapsed.
Let's just not end up like Rapture ;>. Otherwise I think your idea is sound, there seem to be only little things left to be ironed out. Count me in, I will funnel some hedge fund money towards our goal.
Comment has been collapsed.
So a white nationalist terrorist in the US over the weekend and now this. Disgusting.
Comment has been collapsed.
As depressing as: 622
people have been shot and killed by police in 2017.
Read about our methodology. Download the data. See the 2016 and 2015 databases. Submit a tip
Mental illness played a role in a quarter of incidents.
Comment has been collapsed.
Different kinds of violence, state versus religious.
Comment has been collapsed.
How many of that people were proven innocent victims? That's the number you are supposed to show here. THAT IS problematic.
You really can't compare terrorist attacking random people and police trying to defend citizens from idiots who can't even listen when police shouts "Drop the gun" 50 times.
Sidenote: oh geeze, I ratinoally supported police, that's at least 4 blacklists :(
Comment has been collapsed.
This is not a TV, you cannot just change the racism channel... the news networks will not allow it, it's where their fortune was created.
Comment has been collapsed.
And hop to blacklist. Racist are about the only people I blacklist on Steam or SG really.
Comment has been collapsed.
white nationalist terrorist in the US
presumptions and lurid newspaper headlines
Not even comparable - lefties along with antifa thugs illegally protesting on the streets while reportedly attacking cars at random hit also that 21 y.o. white nazi fanboys car who then probably feared for his life plowed through a bunch but didn't really aim for them. Else he wouldn't have gone straight down the road into other cars. And why didn't he kill any on the retreat ... going straight down the road again.
He hasn't even been prosecuted yet, for the incident he's a likely to be a lifer, but won't be charged with intent to kill (terrorism).
https://www.allenbwest.com/2017/08/14/new-shock-theory-emerges-charlottesville-drivers-motive-blowing-minds/
Comment has been collapsed.
also that 21 y.o. white nazi fanboys car who then probably feared for his life plowed through a bunch but didn't really aim for them.
Wow.
Yeah I can totally see why they held their foot on the gas even while plowing into people, even when they reach a speed that can't be matched on foot, and didn't touch the horn. You don't have to 'aim' when the road is literally wall-to-wall filled. They killed only once person while launching down the packed crowd, why do you think that the fact they didn't kill anyone while reversing through the crowd was an intentional thing? The link you provided is far from unbiased, and despite what it says, the car was struck with a bat only after it began accelerating (listen to the audio). Presumptions? You couldn't bend over backwards any harder. :U
Comment has been collapsed.
You don't have to 'aim' when the road is literally wall-to-wall filled. They killed only once person while launching down the packed crowd, why do you think that the fact they didn't kill anyone while reversing through the crowd was an intentional thing? The link you provided is far from unbiased, and despite what it says, the car was struck with a bat only after it began accelerating (listen to the audio). Presumptions?
Accuses me of guessing and guesses himself lol ...
Like your rambling except i provided mine with the reasonable guess of someone else - its pointless until the authorities figure it out. Till then, i'd assume based on what i've seen that he hadn't intent to kill. As he panicked viewing himself as their "arch enemy", while some of them "bash a fash" thugs among the entire illegal protest, attacked his car in that moment or just before kinda making their intent for violence clear. If he held right there, he'd be a sitting duck being swarmed ...
Comment has been collapsed.
If it's pointless until the authorities figure it out, why did you offer your opinion? As much as you may feel dissent from your opinion is 'rambling', you don't mind repeatedly focusing on that they assembled without permit for convenient portrayal points. If you treat Antifa as a hivemind that embraces and promotes outright violence as a whole, why are you so willing to give the benefit of the doubt to someone who plowed into a crowd? Whether they're white nationalist or not, they still chose to react immediately to cosmetic damage to their vehicle by putting a ton of people under their tires (as opposed to like, evaluating or sparing even a momentary glance before holding onto the accelerator), so your "lets just wait to hear the facts!" in the face of this rings very hollow.
With that out of the way. I disagree with your assumption. You have nothing to infer his emotional state that does not equally point to an intent to harm. While I reviewed the footage again and couldn't find the original one I saw, only a shaky watermarked version of the rear footage now, and the audio timing seems slightly different (desync?). The vehicle may have indeed been damaged prior to the video being shot, but even if we assume some asshole among the counter-protesters struck his vehicle prior incident that was filmed, that does not validate an indiscriminate vehicular attack on a large group of confined people, much less one that was entirely unnecessary.
The car is not actively surrounded by people or in immediate threat at the time of its approach, so if he was in fear of being swarmed, why did he approach the protester crowd when the rear was practically devoid of people from what we can see? If fearful of protesters, why had they choose to move down this street? They don't exactly cast a small silhouette. When a driver hears a thud on their car, even when on edge, you don't randomly decide to peel out directly into a crowd with no chance to avoid grievous harm, much less keep going until you impact something or punch through the other side. There was also a constant acceleration until impact once it began (whether that happened prior to the one bat strike or at the exact moment, I can't tell now, wondering about potential audio desync of some kind?).
Its worth considering that agent provocateurs are a fairly common tactic used in protests to allow counter-forces to suppress, it's not beyond the realm of possibility that this was premeditated, and striking the vehicle was to be used as a validation for the attack. Consider for instance, that several other vehicles were able to move through the crowd without being assaulted. What exactly caused that individual to strike that one specific car? Why would a genuine counter protester attack a vehicle that is likely to be owned by another counter protester or neutral party given its proximity to the actual protesting group? I don't see anything on the car that identifies them as a white nationalist. Correct me if I'm wrong. It's also easy to pose as a member of a disorganised group to discredit them through actions not actually of their own. Consider that their opposition vary between permissive, sympathetic or in outright support of ethnic cleansing. It is not exactly a leap to see their fringe as capable of this.
Comment has been collapsed.
If it's pointless until the authorities figure it out, why did you offer your opinion?
Odd too even ask that, seeing how public information fit the narrative "21 y.o. nazi fanboy partaking in unite the right" which is not a good occasion for the "right" to have a "chimp out". How the most crucial part unfolded *age restricted yb video requires proper age and login. Which doesn't mean there couldn't be more to it ... "- its pointless until the authorities figure it out. Till then, I'd assume based on what I've seen that he hadn't intent to kill."
As for the rest of your drivel and questions neither you or i could properly answer - I'll return this to you.:
I disagree with your assumption.
Comment has been collapsed.
Drivel. Right.
Dunno why you linked to that video, skimming through it, it's just some other rando restating stuff I've already covered, and focusing on regurgitating stuff that shifts the onus. Linking to articles and talk-pieces especially by anybody with nothing new to offer is always obnoxious, because it substitutes your own opinion with someone elses and expects the person you're discussing with to do the footwork on your behalf, while relieving you of direct criticism should a direct rebuttal utterly erase a point. But whatever, I'll bite just a little.
So lets re-cover the perpetually repeated :
1) Focusing on Antifa carrying sticks when their opposition open (and closed)-carry firearms and are permissive or openly support ethnic cleansing is strange. Both sides see their opposition as hostile and potentially violent, and have been fed stories about protest groups attacking each other, meaning people want to protect themselves. Holding Antifa accountable for this while neglecting to consider the overarching situation is strange. Also recall that anybody can wrap up, grab a stick, and claim to be antifa even if they're actually agitants or agent provocateurs.
2)Nobody here has challenged reversing out of a violent crowd. I have not seen anybody anywhere else suggesting that reversing out of a violent crowd is itself a bad thing even when the attackers are shunted by the vehicle. Focusing on that part when nobody is underlining it, while also ignoring the fact they're only openly violent because a fucking car just floored it into the group is very dishonest. Equating the violent actions of an attacked protest group with the mindset of the protest group (and car-attacker) prior to the incident is intentional and dishonest. Had somebody driven a vehicle into an open-carry protest group, are you suggesting nobody would have attempted to neutralise the driver or wreck the vehicle?
3) Because the driver didn't try moves to maximise casualties by swerving, it doesn't mean the attack wasn't intentional. Swerving would have very likely made retreat from the scene either more difficult, or outright impossible. I recall there were objects obstructing the side of the road (posts, etc?) so a straight run could have in fact been one way to maximise impacts. The video you linked also frames this question by asking why the driver didn't do it "like muslim terrorists" which betrays their bias more than their username of "Story Time with Jesus" could.
Now, are we done here or shall we go around in another circle? :P
Comment has been collapsed.
tl;dr - skimmed through ... The one thing that got evident from this, is that you're going to hell. Why?
1) Jesus is not some rando on the internet.
2) "Story Time with Jesus" are you kidding me? Jesus knows best.
3) Jesus being biased - are you kidding me?
4) How dare you write your own story time?
How can't you see the obvious ... i was kind enough to link in that article/video/pic explaining it in a way, anyone
could draw their own conclusions of what went down there and maybe just might've happened before he got there.
You see, its not your job to guess, nor is it mine ... but with all the evidence that is gathered, witnesses and lengthy interrogation of the offender - one could come to a valid verdict. But apparently, you're either trying to win the argument, "wuz terrorism" or you're shallow enough to take the lurid pieces news-outlets put out for granted. Anyway ... good job on figuring it out your opinion based on the info inspector gadget. The authorities are proud, have this 2nd place medal emoji as a reward - you've earned. 🥈
Now, are we done here or shall we go around in another circle? :P
I think now we're done unless you have another tale of guesses to tell ... I'm all ears sonny.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well. My bad for giving you the benefit of the doubt, I suppose.
Comment has been collapsed.
I have to regrettably disagree with your statement.
So long as people live under the constant threat of terrorist attacks, terrorists have already won. So long as fear governs conscience, people will alter their attitudes and expectations. Political agitators will use crises to pursue agendas. Laws will be passed to lessen personal liberties in western nations. Democracies will start to erode little by little, crisis by crisis. They already have won. They win so much that they may even get tired of winning and they'll say 'please please western nations it's too much winning, we can't take it anymore!'. And the west will say, 'no it isn't! You have to keep winning, you have to win more! You're going to win so much!'.
What a tragic and senseless loss of life. Absolutely monstrous acts committed by cowards. Western NEO-Nazi idiots, KKK racists, BLM cop killers, and ANTIFA thugs destroying the USA from within. All of these groups stuck on their own little fantasy issues, getting a standing ovation from ISIS. Meanwhile North Korea idiot stumbles around looking for unicorns adding to the global level of stupidity, getting a standing ovation from ISIS.
Can we just do something? Can we just end this threat? Can we just agree that global extreme islamist sponsored terrorism is a bad thing and join together to defeat it? Or do we have to keep sitting here pretending that black lives don't matter? Or do we have to keep pretending that the President and the 63 million voters who voted for him are inherently racist?
Oh, but that might cost the news networks viewer ratings, thus lowering advertising revenue and lowering profits and stock prices so that would negatively impact the top 0.01% of America... so I guess we do have to keep doing those things. Never mind.
Comment has been collapsed.
I agree that a lot of times... we don't need ISIS. There are enough lunatics running around everywhere. Driving into groups because they're drunk, knifing/shooting people because they had an argument.
They're living in the Christian era of the crusades. And well, frankly: some christians are also still living in that era!
Comment has been collapsed.
Can we just agree that global extreme islamist sponsored terrorism is a bad thing and join together to defeat it?
It will not be defeated until there is an actual Islamic State to help stamp it out. The non-Muslims are competent enough in identifying and dealing with their own terrorists, but they are clueless when it comes to dealing with Muslims. You would need a true Islamic State to do that.
However, considering how all attempts to form such a government have been sabotaged and/or nullified thus far, that possibility seems remote. Even if it is true that the Islamic State would end ISIS, Al Qaedah, Hizbullaah, and all other such groups, people are scared to death. Even if the non-Muslims kept their hands out of our affairs and allowed the Khilafah to return, even if they allied with it to stamp out terrorism, they would simply target the Muslims, after. Fear disables rationality.
Comment has been collapsed.
My condolences who has suffered from that. Always sad to hear people lose their lives over something like this.
Comment has been collapsed.
I hope everyone and their loved ones in that area are safe and sound. Been following this on the news and on the web now, and it's a truly tragic event.
My heart and condolences go out to the victims, their families, and their friends.
Comment has been collapsed.
The modus operandi (using a car, van or truck as a weapon) of this act of terror by one, possibly two terrorists that are armed and hold up in a Turkish restaurant is that of daesh.
Comment has been collapsed.
My sister lives there, just messaged me to tell. She was near when it happened, but she's ok at home now. That's really awful.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes, this is lot more cowardly than sending drone strikes while sitting 10k miles away in a US army sofa...
I sure don't like these guys either, but I don't get why so many people keep calling them "cowards" while there are so many much more relevant insults
Comment has been collapsed.
You do see the difference between attacking enemies soldiers and civilians ? I dont recall dron strikes against civilians on purpose. Do you ?
Attacking civilians is easy, it is a coward act. In most of those attacks muslim get killed and hurt. So who are they fighting with ? The same like suecide act on market place in iraq/syria etc. WTF, killing arabs.
They have NO RULES, NO HONOR and surely its NOT ABOUT GOD they speak about so much.
If thats ok with you, then well, go back to asia and leave western world.
eot
Comment has been collapsed.
All I'm saying is that attacking soldiers who don't have the slightest chance to shoot back is way safer than attacking civilians who are protected by a police force able to shoot at you. The guys from the Spain terror attacks got killed or caught, right?
Again, I'm not saying this isn't disgusting, horrible, dishonorable, criminal, psycho, sickening, etc. But "cowardly" is just not the word.
Comment has been collapsed.
My deepest thoughts to spanish people. How can these cowards believe they can be rewarded afterlife for the slaughtering of random unarmed civilians - including children, this is beyond my understanding.
Comment has been collapsed.
Wonderful Barcelona, Stay Strong
don't know why but this one hurts. a lot. Love you, Spanish people.
Comment has been collapsed.
a shout out to all spanish peeps out there keep it strong and dont let them win by making you afraid.... hope next isnt here in portugal
Comment has been collapsed.
Daesh has claimed the terrorist attack in Barcelona. Not a big surprise.
My sincere condolences to the loved ones and friends of the 13 victims that were murdered and the 80+ people who are wounded.
Edit: I just heard that one of the murder victims is a Belgian woman.
To the Spanish people: you're not alone and do not change your life's, don't give the vile and evil daesh that satisfaction.
Comment has been collapsed.
I bet no one predict transformers coming that early...
Comment has been collapsed.
looks like the previous colored chalk show with hugs, rainbows and john lennon songs did not help much to prevent further massacres of european civilians. imagine my shock.
a possible suspect was already identified. Driss Oukabir, 20 yo moroccan with french citizenship which was now living in ripoll, catalonia. spanish police authorities claim that it was him to rent that van. boy seems to have rented another van which was sighted a few hours after the attack in the city of vic. the police is still after it.
meanwhile my fb page is full with skinny legged teen with dyed hair and soft moustache mumbling about how this might be a conspiracy by the evil fascist to cover up the alleged terrorist attack in charlottesville. paranoia and persecution complex are on the rise.
Comment has been collapsed.
Time of crisis for sure, everyone trying to find a good guilty.
Comment has been collapsed.
There is no time to discuss ending terrorist threats when we have to debate which civil war statues need to be removed, which streets need to be renamed, which founding father was a slave owner.
Comment has been collapsed.
You'll have to wait there... your carrot is playing Golf... As that seems to be the most important thing!
Comment has been collapsed.
while in the meantime we don't miss any chance to blame syria (muh democracy, muh human rights, assad s a diddador, ...), the country that first of any other has taken the bull by its horns, experiencing the highest cost in therm of lost lives. the cuckoldry of the west has reached the tipping point.
Comment has been collapsed.
looks like the previous colored chalk show with hugs, rainbows and john lennon songs did not help much to prevent further massacres of european civilians. imagine my shock.
I know right? Who would have thought...
Comment has been collapsed.
And another one in El Canar who is tied to Barcelona.
Comment has been collapsed.
Just remember, it is Islamophobia to refer to these people as terrorists - at least in Canada under the M103 law. Don't worry, the rest of the west won't be too far behind.
Comment has been collapsed.
wha? O____o is that literally what that law says or it's up to interpretation?
Comment has been collapsed.
Don't ask me, I wasn't arrested... but this guy was for online comments about Islam.
Islam isn't just taking over Europe... its happening all over the west. Don't take my word for it, there are plenty of reputable sources discussing no-go zones, newspaper op-ed's for why Sharia Law should supersede the US Constitution, polls, interviews on youtube of Muslims on the streets in major western cities. Seriously, don't take my word for it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Terrorist is someone that uses terror as a weapon. Terrorists can follow a god or any at all...
Comment has been collapsed.
Canada's hate crime laws are slightly different it has to rise to a certain level, I doubt this guy was just saying what you were saying he was probably going further, ie trying to incite hatred/violence. I mean he probably doesn't see it that way, but this case will be interesting to see how it plays out. It will play out. Because we do have freedom of speech to a degree. There are legal ways to get around it, though we do need to stop making policy on the actions of a few hurt feelings. The fact of the matter is, Canada gets less terrorist attacks than America and Europe, probably cause it's Canada. When it starts happening here trust me shit will change. Honestly shit like this is just a distraction.
Comment has been collapsed.
Excuse me sir, but you either have the freedom of speech, or you don't. There are no 'degrees' of it.
Comment has been collapsed.
By that logic you don't have freedom of speech in the United States, there are things you can't say and you know this. You can't yell fire in a theater when there is no fire, you can't threaten someone, you can't joke about their being a bomb when there is not. Hell you can't even verbally fantasize about some pretty twisted shit, unless you want someone to report you to the government. The case of that man that wanted to kidnap women and eat them or some shit, yeah they got arrested for not doing anything just saying it. You can't incite a riot or violence against another person.
We do have hate speech laws, but it needs to get to a certain point before the government will do anything about it. You can say all <insert race/religion/whatever here> is terrible, they're all goat fuckers and no one is going to bang at my door and arrest me. Hell those racist rants that have happened in Canada, they didn't get arrested. Now that guy, who got arrested. You have no idea what he said, maybe he threatened them, or perhaps he harassed them, you don't know but just because he's saying that it's just because of this law. No one has read what he wrote, it's just this guy claiming something. So that's why I'm withholding judgement until the details come out.
So this idea that you can just say anything you want and the government won't do anything about it, is patently false. There needs to be a line somewhere.
Comment has been collapsed.
There are enough no-go zones that aren't Islam related. Probably sort of like gang turf in the US. And as far as terrorists... remember the Unabomber? Right-wing extremists killing blacks? Christians killing anti-abortion doctors?
Where's the Islam in there?
Comment has been collapsed.
Christians killing anti-abortion doctors
That sounds a bit weird, shouldn't it be pro-abortion doctors?
Comment has been collapsed.
To be fair relgious extremism doesnt make sense so i wouldn't be suprised
'ha take that you anti-abortion scum!'
'wait shouldn't we be killing pro-abortion doctors?'
'Bugger!'
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes, I do remember the lone wolf psycho Ted Kaczynski and I also remember Timothy McVeigh (although you didn't mention him). I do remember right wing extremist KKK psychos murdering blacks. I do remember left wing BLM psychos assassinating police officers. I do remember lunatic christians bombing abortion clinics.
Now add up the death toll... and see that it isn't even remotely close to Islamic terrorism. Not even REMOTELY close.
The people I listed above are a tiny minority of Americans... not even a full 1% of people. Be honest with yourself. The percentage of the 1.5 Billion Muslims on this Earth that are actually good people who don't want to destroy the west, who don't want to murder gays, who don't want to have sex slaves, who don't want to wage jihad, who want to love everyone and be peaceful are the absolute TINY MINORITY. The majority want Sharia over all laws.... they want Islam as the only religion on earth... they are not willing to die for their cause, but see nothing wrong with those who choose to do so. The other 20%... they are the fanatics.... they are the ISIS people (not necessarily members of but share the same mindset and conviction of religion)... they have the loudest voice in the community - they are not looked at like the psychos... they are looked at like the heroes.
Get over your pretend islamaphobia outrage and get some facts ben affleck.
Comment has been collapsed.
Here are some take aways:
86% of Muslims in the USA say [suicide bombings and other forms of violence against civilians in the name of Islam] tactics are rarely or never justified. That means 14% say they are justified. Also don't forget that the 86% say... are RARELY justified... that means they sometimes ARE justified.
8% of Turkish muslims view ISIS favorably, 11% of Malaysians, 9% of Pakistani's (while another 62% had 'no opinion' on ISIS - give me a break).
Want to become an apostate? Hope you don't enjoy living.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-29372494
Muslim's are so peaceful, record numbers of them are leaving their new western host nations temporarily to return to the fight.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/hundreds-more-uk-muslims-choose-jihad-than-army-l38256qqxx3
They want to fight, but not in their new host nations military.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/2002/04/13/saudi-telethon-raises-over-100-million-for-palestinians.html
^^ Written by AP (not fox) "A 6-year-old boy, with a plastic gun slung over his shoulder and fake explosives strapped around his waist, walked into a donation center and made a symbolic donation of plastic explosives"
The above are FACT CHECKED REPORTS (and a study) from CREDIBLE sources. I am not listening to propaganda - it is YOU who are listening to the Islamophobia propaganda propped up by far left liberalism in the west.
The son of Hezbollah's leader has spoken out about Islam. Thousands of former Muslims speak out about Islam on youtube EVERY DAY... and you pretend it is 'bigoted white people' attacking 'that peaceful religion of Islam'. You are a fool to think that. I live in the middle east, I have lived in multiple Muslim nations. So please... read something other than the 'you should love Islam' mantra that is being pushed while the truth is staring you in the face!
Comment has been collapsed.
Don't worry about him. He has his lens through which he sees things, and he's not giving it up for your arguments.
Comment has been collapsed.
i'm honestly new to all this, propaganda stuff and this is maybe the 2/3rd time seeing an argument on religious stuff and i think apart from dLo no one is trying to back their arguments with facts/new articles. :(( i dont really care much but maybe he has a point
Comment has been collapsed.
... and i think apart from dLo no one is trying to back their arguments with facts/new articles.
There have been various people posting various articles to back up their statements. For the most part, however, the participants in this discussion are simply voicing their opinions. The majority seem content to express these feelings and let others do the same, but a few individuals insist on debating whose opinion is "right." It is one thing to discuss why one feels a certain way about a topic, but something else entirely to argue that others are morons because they do not concur.
I agree with you that dLo does have a point, and I also believe that dLo is entitled to his opinion. When dLo presents his opinion as a fact, however, and seeks to debate it in this arena with (at best) partial information, he runs into resistance.
Comment has been collapsed.
What did that guy actually say in the online comments one? i only as because we had a similar one few months back in the UK where alot of people got angry when a guy got arrested for his comments on facebook, and people where shouting 'grr, what about free speech etc' but when looked into he said something like 'I'm going to go out and slaughter some muslims'
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't know what he said... what did Omar Khadr say online... oh wait... he murdered US military members and then got $10.5 million dollars from the Canadian government... my bad. Canada is clearly not pro-islam LOL.
Comment has been collapsed.
Comment has been collapsed.
It doesn't looks like he said anything online, i thought you were giving an example of someone who said something bad online and got away with it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh no, he didn't say anything online... he didn't talk about going out and slaughtering some infidels... he actually did it. But that doesn't violate Canadian law because he is Muslim so to put him in prison for murder is racist and bigoted so instead they awarded him $10.5 million CAD for his time spent in US prisons.
Comment has been collapsed.
while we can both agree that, that case is nuts and that guy should have stayed in prison. If this other guy (who we don't know what he said) did indeed say 'i'm gonna go killing' then he too should be in trouble.
Comment has been collapsed.
I respectfully disagree with you. You either have free speech or you don't. People in the USA can even say they are going to kill the President and unless the secret service proves intent to action behind the speech, there are no arrests, and no one is in trouble. Words without intent are simply words. Now you may think those words are unpleasant, disrespectful, and even lacking morality... but they should be (and are in the USA) protected by free speech law.
Comment has been collapsed.
i think saying, 'i'm going to kill the president' (in context of course) in itself proves intent.
Comment has been collapsed.
Robert De Niro said he wants to 'Punch President Trump in the face'. I don't think that proves intent - I think that proves aggravation and emotion.
Johnny Depp said 'When was the last time an actor assassinated a president? I want to clarify: I'm not an actor. I lie for a living. However, it's been awhile and maybe it's time." I don't think that proves intent - I think it proves poor judgement.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thats different to say if someone posted 'I'm going to go to the next trump rally and gun him down'
Comment has been collapsed.
The Secret Service categorizes all threats, online and offline alike, into one of three categories, according to Kessler. Class 3 threats are considered the most serious, and require agents to interview the individual who issued the threat and any acquaintances to determine whether that person really has the capability to carry out the threat. Class 2 threats are considered to be serious but issued by people incapable of actually follow up on their intentions, either because they are in jail or located at a great distance from the president. And Class 1 threats are those that may seem serious at first, but are determined not to be.
Classifying threats into these categories is partly a matter of wording and specificity—whether the speaker has developed a detailed plan, whether they state that they will kill the president or just that someone should kill the president—but also depends largely on the background of the people who issue them. “The Secret Service looks at whether this person has expressed similar plans previously, whether this person has a criminal record, or is mentally ill,” Kessler said.
Comment has been collapsed.
But let's bring this back around to Canada M103 law with some practical exercises:
If you were to say (as a Canadian - or while visiting Canada) "Muslims are the worst, let's kill them all" - you would go to jail because you committed a hate thought crime. Whether you could kill any Muslim, much less all of them is irrelevant.
If you were to say (as a Canadian - or while visiting Canada) "Muslims are the worst, let's send them back to the middle east" - you would go to jail because you committed a hate thought crime. Even though no explicit threat of violence occurred - you were just bigoted.
If you were to say (as a Canadian - or while visiting Canada) "The Prophet Mohamed can eat a bag of dicks" - you would go to jail because you committed a hate thought crime. Obviously Mohamed is dead and can't eat a bag of anything but you spoke blasphemy against a protected religion.
Should you go to jail? I would say, regardless of if you think the above statements are 'horrific' or 'insensitive' or even 'awesome'... unequivocally NO.
Comment has been collapsed.
while i will agree that no action should ever be taken for example 2 and 3 because these are opinions, if ,for example 1, they have good enough reason to believe that you might kill someone they should at least look into it (not immediately go to jail dont pass go do not collect $200). and by good reason i mean like a criminal record, a history of violence or mental illness, etc
I mean it is easy to look into robert de niro and johnny depp and see that they have no history of mental illness or violence and will never follow through on their 'jokes'
and that same rule should apply regardless of race , belief, sex etc etc.
if we say free speech means any one can threaten to kill anyone then no one will feel safe.
Comment has been collapsed.
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Free speech DOES mean anyone can threaten to kill anyone. There are NO limits to free speech according to the judgement of the US Supreme Court. If that makes you feel uncomfortable, then you are welcome to feel as such. And if you were to fight to limit free speech, then I would be willing to die opposing you.
Comment has been collapsed.
US prison? He was tortured in Guantanamo. We should have handled it. We as Canadians, because he's a Canadian citizen should have fucking handled it. Instead of allowing him to be tortured, he was a child soldier, you're an ex-soldier, you should know these things. You're upset that he got 10.5 million dollars. So am I. I'm fucking pissed that he got that money. I'm also pissed that my government violated his rights. This was a no win situation. Khadr’s $20-million civil suit is that Canadian officials violated his rights when they interrogated him in Guantanamo in 2003 and 2004, knowing he was a minor, without legal representation and had been subjected to torture. That was why he sued, and guess what legally he's in the right. Unfortunately. He's in the right. We should have done better instead of losing our god damn heads every time terrorists raise their ugly heads.
You know there are special rules when it comes to children soldiers, yet you ignore it, because this guy killed someone on your side. If you decide to break the rule of law, just because something shitty happened to you, then you're letting "terrorists" win. You want to change hearts and minds, then quite frankly you need to be better than them. Omar Khadir was a child, his father kidnapped him and handed him a gun. Different rules apply to him, regardless of he's a terrorist (still falls under the children soldier situation) or not. He was a child, he fell under those rules. You know it, I know it. Our government let another government ignore his rights (we were made aware of what was going on we chose to allow it, and there is case law and actual laws about what to do when this happens, which we ignored). That's why they're paying. Not because he killed someone, this isn't a reward for killing someone. I'm not happy, but we need to follow our own laws.
So don't spin it as oh Canada is rewarding Islamic terrorism. We're not. We broke our own laws, there is a legal precedent for this shit, it would have been worse if it went through the court system here. Because we actually try and get justice done.
Comment has been collapsed.
Excuse me, children soldiers are no less effective at killing enemy combatants. This kid DID kill 1 servicemen and blinded another. Only due to bullshit ROE that are forced upon our soldiers did this piece of shit 'child' get arrested instead of killed. Meanwhile, you sit here and defend him and his payment? What is a disgrace. Canada should have paid the blind soldier.... or the family of the US Soldier that child murdered.... light years ahead of paying this enemy combatant.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm not saying that children soldiers are different at their effectiveness at killing soldiers, I'm saying that they're treated differently. Have you even met a child soldier? I have, I heard the shit they put him through, I saw the pain in his eyes, as he talked about how they literally fucked him over (Sudanese conflict). Also talked with a survivor of torture, and guess what he hadn't even done anything wrong when they captured him and tortured him for three years. You know what I learned? That I as a human need to be fucking better. There are different rules when it comes to child soldiers, you know this as well as I do, it's one thing to kill them on the battlefield (which you didn't do) and then different rules apply period. Most of the time they are forced into the situation, give a baby a gun and they could kill someone.
If he's dead this isn't a problem but you didn't kill him on the battlefield and as such your rules of law apply. Knowing that, my government needed to do the right thing. The only time his rights are suspended and this applies to America is when there is an imminent threat, you didn't kill him. He was no longer a threat, you needed to apply your own laws you have, Canada needed to apply theirs.
I don't think I'm being clear here. I don't support Omar Khadr (my opinion of him is about the same as yours). I do not think he should have gotten 10.5 million dollars, I am pissed that my government gave him an opening to sue. There is no law in Canada that says if you're convicted of terrorism you get your citizenship revoked in a combat situation they are temporarily suspended but he was captured, there isn't one in the United States either. So if Omar Khadr was American, trust me your government would have paid out far more. It's not a liberal or a conservative thing, it's not even a right or left issue it's a rule of law issue. You may disagree with the law, but I would rather my own government follow the laws that it put upon itself, just like I hope that you would for your country. In some cases like this one this shit doesn't work out, but that just means that my government should learn from this and make sure it doesn't happen again. Cross your T's dot your I's and make sure that people like Omar Khadr rot in prison where they belong.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes, I have met a child soldier... who was part of a group of men who attacked our convoy and was firing an ak-47 at us in afghanistan... couldn't have been older than 13. I don't know who put a bullet in that kid, but I was sure glad that someone had.
And we wouldn't have paid him a damn thing.
Comment has been collapsed.
Also dLo, I know we piss each other off, but what makes you think that liberals are happy about this. Canada is far more left leaning than the United states and 80% of canadians are pissed about this decision. Also, I want to point out this isn't the first time it's happened. It happened under our conservative government, this was being adjudicated under our conservative government as well, the mess just happened to come to its conclusion under the liberal government. They had already made a ruling in this case, the issue was whether to appeal or not. The liberals chose not to because the outcome wouldn't have changed, there was already case law based on this, and again rule of law wasn't on their side. The question is how much does he get, because he's already won. But saying that this is a liberal thing when quite frankly it isn't shows your bias. It's a law problem, and your country has similar laws in this regard.
Comment has been collapsed.
"just goes to show how far left Canada is leaning right now"
I don't know how to do quotes. Not a right/left thing. It's a rule of law thing. All becase it's not something that you agree with, doesn't make it a right/left thing. Funny enough the US has similar laws to this. As does most western thinking countries. You don't like the law then work to get it changed, keeping in mind that this is an international thing, and the moment you start changing shit it becomes a problem and an opening for propaganda.
Also once again, you invaded the country he was in. He has dual citizenship, you can't then claim injuries for your soldiers and reparations when you invade. It never works out well, I mean for fucks sake look at the shit show that is North Korea, you want more anti-American sentiment to start rising? Of course not you want people to love your country.
Comment has been collapsed.
well, if I understood correctly, this is motion 103 has no legal implications and is non-binding. Still, bizzare news are always fun in its own way.
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh Canada ... thats what you get when a drama substitute teacher
and part time ski instructor is allowed to step into his fathers shoes.
ca-related almost "fun" to watch:
Comment has been collapsed.
How exactly does a sane person award 10.5 million CAD to a taliban militant who killed an American? I can see how the Taliban would award him money... not the Canadian government. But I guess since I am not a nutjob liberal I wouldn't understand.... it's probably because im a bigot... not because I have a respect for life or service.
Comment has been collapsed.
CA justice system ruled in his favor ... pretty much insane from start to finish.
- be jet setting between CA - and various stan-shitholes
- commit war crime in Afghanistan (killing 1, blinding another @ age 15) get nabbed by the US
- be brought to Guantanamo bay - be sentenced for 8 years "or so" ...
- be released before to CA to serve the remaining time there
- in CA come up with "dindu nuffin ... wuz under duress"
- lawyer up, file for a 20 Million USD wrongful imprisonment suit "arguing CA-gov. should've helped him" *
- win lawsuit be granted only ~ 8 Million USD and official apology by CA-gov.
Comment has been collapsed.
He won because Canada is more concerned with PR and not being called racists and bigots than they are about justice. Canada has completely lost it. America is going to need two walls.
Comment has been collapsed.
As nice as that would be in a practical thought exercise, I am sure the NATO nations would not like that to happen when they have an aggressive Russia at their back door and can't even keep their military funding obligations. I think many nations around the world would miss the US money train of foreign aid... but if it were up to me I'd cut all foreign aid funding.
Comment has been collapsed.
He was 15. Everyone knows what goes on in Guantanamo, we allowed it to happen. He would have been prosecuted here and spent a life in prison (Harper was in charge). This is a PR nightmare, and pretending that torture doesn't go in Guantanamo, is bullshit. Pretending that many people who are held there aren't forced to give false confessions is bullshit. If he had gone to anywhere else, an actual US prison, not whatever the fuck guantanamo is, then guess what he doesn't get 10.5 million dollars.
Saying that this is good PR is bullshit, because the vast majority of Canadians are against our government giving 10.5 million to a guy who said he killed a soldier. Once again, we broke our own laws. And just like any other criminal who sues the government for money because they violated their rights, and gets a huge sum of money this is exactly the case here. You don't have to agree with it, but if a cop touches a suspect and beats a confession out of them in the United States, and it's found out about, even if that person did it guess what they're going to get from your government? A huge fucking check. So stop being all worked up, this isn't new. He was a Canadian citizen, and we don't go on and kill our own citizens in foreign countries, we don't hand them off to be tortured by a foreign government, if that means you need to build a wall between us then so be it. Because last I thought, Americans were supposed to share those same values. Guess not.
BTW, if we had attempted to "intervene" a few times, ie asked the American government for Omar Khadr back, even if we really didn't want him back (legal loophole), he doesn't get millions of dollars. Most of this is Harper's fault and I dislike Trudeau, but he's stuck in a bind, our government knew and ignored it.
Comment has been collapsed.
When one of your citizens becomes an enemy combatant against CANADA and other coalition nations then their rights as a Canadian should be TERMINATED on the spot. The fact that your politicians allowed him some semblance of rights as such, never mind having killed and wounded soldiers, just goes to show how far left Canada is leaning right now. I hope this turd was tortured in gitmo, I hope he was raped, I hope the violence he perpetrated was returned on him 100 fold.
Comment has been collapsed.
Are you kidding me? Are you fucking kidding me. Not even the US does shit like that. He's a Canadian citizen. If he was a US citizen that wouldn't have been done. He was 15 at the time. His age does matter, even if you think it doesn't it's against the Geneva convention and we're supposed to be better than that. If our government had done what it was supposed to do. He would be in jail right now not with 10.5 million dollars in his fucking pocket. This is a failure of our fucking government. I do not want my government ignoring war crimes, I want my government to act rationally and do every thing by the fucking book.
I'm not for Omar Khadr, I want him to be in prison. I'm fucking pissed that my government didn't do the right fucking thing, thus giving him an opening. He was 15, and if he was killed on the fucking battlefield then who the fuck cares, but the moment he's not a threat anymore, the moment he's captured, then rule of law needs to apply. You don't get to torture enemy combatants after you capture them. One, it is perfect propaganda for the other side, and two it flaunts international law. By your idiotic definition, if a US soldier gets captured, all you need to do is label him an enemy combatant and everything that was done to Omar Khadr will happen to him. And you would be rightfully so, outraged. Because whether you want to admit it or not, the US invaded another country. You may not see it like that but the fact is, if I don't know China invaded America tomorrow, and you shot and killed a Chinese soldier, and wounded another one, and the Chinese took you to their equivalent of Guantanamo bay is, which is like any of their prisons. You're an enemy combatant, and lets say the US government questions you for whatever reason, after you've been tortured, and you know what you might not break. You're an old man, you've seen some shit you've done some shit. He was 15. Once again he falls under the child soldier aspect, and it seems that you're perfectly okay with your country committing war crimes if they happen to kill a solider. That doesn't make me a liberal because I believe in the rule of law should apply to my fucking government as well.
You're focusing on the money aspect, I'm not.I don't care about how much money he got, I care that our government fucked up and now my tax payer dollars are being given to that asshole
We're not going to agree on this. But if you think that it's perfectly okay to treat Omar Khadr like this, then you're perfectly fine with criminals in your home country being treated like this. If they're a criminal then that's fine they're rights should be suspended, except that's literally not true.
Comment has been collapsed.
The US has used drone strikes to kill its citizens who joined the enemy. They are called DEFECTORS. Our rule of law used to not apply to those people. Even Obama used drone strikes on them.
Comment has been collapsed.
The US has done a lot of shit in the name of fighting terrorism, including changing the definition of torture to allow for waterboarding. You called it what? Enhanced interrogation. So the fact that you break your own laws, for someone who is a small government guy should terrify the shit out of you, I mean all those slippery slope arguments are happening in real time and no one is doing jackshit to stop it. You touched on it earlier, but again you're more concerned about me holding my government accountable which again not a right/left issue. Because at the core this is what the Omar Khadr situation is, and I'm not for him. I do not think that justice was served at all, but I'm aware that sometimes justice simply isn't served at all.
I know about Anwar al-Awlaki, so here's my question was he physically in your custody? No. As I pointed out when the threat is still active, his rights are suspended. Just as in any other situation when you're fighting people. My point still stands, could you have captured him? Maybe, at the cost of human life, and that's an equation for someone way above my pay grade. But the moment he's in American custody, his American rights apply.
Which now begs the question especially when Trump, who we argued about after his victory, is in power, normalizing a bunch of shit that shouldn't be normalized. What's to stop the government from using such tactics in a situation that isn't necessarily as bad as the Anwar al-Awlaki. The reason I hold my government responsible while you seem to not care if they break their word, is so they can't apply the same logic in less important situations. Slippery slope argument, I know but again if there is a massive attack on American soil can you honestly sit there and tell me that you expect Trump of all people to react in a levelheaded way or do you think he'll start suspending rights immediately? Terrorist shit happens and you start talking about interning all the American Muslims, is that where you want to be in history again? You think that won't radicalize more people? dLo I don't think you're a fucking idiot, otherwise I wouldn't challenge you every time we disagree on shit. I do believe in conversation, but you can't actually think that's a good idea do you? There's a reason we have those laws, and yeah sometimes when I'm angry I think like you do but that's why we don't make shitty laws when we're angry.
Comment has been collapsed.
The US Military ROE is much more strict than International law on war. I know that because I experienced mission briefings where other nations on the coalition had to take up frontal positions due to US ROE. These things come out in after action report briefings.
As a war fighter, my contention is pretty simple. War is war. If war broke out today between Russia and the USA and I fought for Russia... I would absolutely expect the US Military to gun me down... no questions asked. To kill military members of my own nation during war is an act of treason. That is how I see it. I will never see it any other way. If the US captured me... I would fully expect that my status as a citizen would be instantly forfeited and US law would not be applicable to me. It is time people accept responsibility for their actions and the very real results that should happen due to those actions. So I would have absolutely supported the military execution of a captured Anwar al-Awlaki.
Military law has been and still is much different than civilian law. To suggest that it will bleed over to civilian law is, imho, absurd. Should Timothy McVay be treated as an enemy combatant? No, his bombing had nothing to do with war. If a US citizen pledges allegiance to ISIS and bombs or kills US citizens (ALA Nidal Hasan) they should absolutely be stripped of citizenship and rights and be executed.
Maybe you don't feel the same way... maybe you have never been to war... maybe I'm a monster... ultimately it doesn't matter. I abide by the law... and neither of our opinions will do anything to alter that law.
Comment has been collapsed.
You didn't kill him. That's what I'm getting at dLo. I don't care if he dies on some battlefield orr hell after the battle and someone you know leaves him to bleed out. But you didn't kill him, this whole situation is because you didn't kill him and took him into custody. You think I'm here preaching rainbows and flowers. I'm not, I understand that war is messy, I understand these things. Hell I wanted to serve as a military doctor, in Canada. I still might, but that's in the future.
I don't think you're a monster, my issue is what happens when he's in custody. Because I agree with you what happens on the battlefield is just that. The issue is what happens when you take someone into custody. We know what he did, the problem is you let him live and now laws have to be followed. You can change the ROE, I don't care the issue is now you captured him. Because I agree with you up until he's physically in custody. Which seems to be where I am far more concerned with what my government does. Because if you're going to kill him, kill him. I'm not here arguing about the ROE, I'm here arguing about what happens when you decide to let him live, because that decision was made. What happens after the fact, is what I'm concerned about.
Okay, so you're saying that in military law they don't get any lawyers, you judge them to be guilty without a fair trial, or any trial? They're just guilty. The end? This is a honest question dLo because that's what you're implying. I'm aware that there is a difference, but the process to my knowledge isn't radically different.
Comment has been collapsed.
This kid, by definition, committed an act of treason. It just happens that Canada treason laws under s46 are punishable by life imprisonment. As such, his rights WERE NOT IN VIOLATION. Canada is part of coalition forces that this individual waged war against
http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/treason/
a) kills, attempts to kill, wounds, imprisons, or restrains the sovereign BING
b) assists an enemy at war with Canada or any armed force against whom Canadian forces are engaged in hostilities, even if no state of war exists BING
There you have it - Canada law is clear - LIFE IN PRISON. Gitmo is a prison.
If I, as a US Citizen did what he did, I very well could be (AND SHOULD BE) executed after capture.
Definition: In Article III, Section 3 of the United States Constitution, treason is specifically limited to levying war against that state or aiding the enemies of that state, and conviction requires two witnesses or a confession in open court.
Penalty: U.S. Code Title 18: Death, or not less than 5 years imprisonment and not more than life imprisonment without the possibility of parole (minimum fine of $10,000, if not sentenced to death).
So... by law... your argument has been proven to be that of strawmen and personal opinions.
Comment has been collapsed.
You violated his rights, and that's the problem. They knew it was happening and let it happen. The fact that you're ignoring this means that I'm not wrong. Gitmo is a blight, if this had been any other prison, we wouldn't have this conversation if he hadn't be tortured. The problem is that you tortured him, and you might think that's fine but those our our laws. This isn't about my personal opinions, they allowed the US government to torture him, there is case law against this in Canada, and there are laws against it. That's the problem. I'm aware of the laws for treason but that doesn't negate the other laws.
Comment has been collapsed.
Excerpts from your own link:
"The question of whether or not detention is permitted for a particular operation will be considered at the strategic level and the answer reflected in the rules of engagement"
"As a general rule, the authority to interrogate derives from the authority to detain"
There was evidence of QUOTE oppressive circumstances ENDQUOTE. If you infer torture from that, then that is your own sentiment and not reflective of any factual information obtained by courts.
According to the ruling he was subjected to sleep deprivation during interrogations at Guantanamo Bay in 2003.
You paid this traitor for not receiving a full nights sleep.
As factual information stands, he commit treason, he was captured, he was imprisoned in gitmo, he was released to canada, canada paid him $10 million.
Comment has been collapsed.
Also I would like to point out that, high profile defense attorneys do a better job in most cases than state or even federal prosecutors. Something OJ Simpson can clearly agree with.
Comment has been collapsed.
terrorist attacks can happen everywhere. we have to be more careful, that's the world we live in now. 😕
Comment has been collapsed.
You sound like the mayor of London... "It's just a part of living in a big city'. How many terror attacks has Tokyo received?
Comment has been collapsed.
There was a major one ~20 years back. Besides the point though, since this is a shit situation and shit like this should never feel normal :/.
Comment has been collapsed.
I only mentioned that it can happen everywhere bc silverio wrote "this isn't France or germany" at the beginning so wtf!?
if you don't want to live in the woods then the only thing to do is to be more careful. i've heard from many ppl that they got "used" to such news and this is fucking awful but I also start thinking "oh no this " again "!
this is nothing to sugarcoat.
Comment has been collapsed.
I went to Spain with my parents when the ETA was doing attacks there. I went with a friend to London multiple times when the IRA was doing attacks there. Probably went to Germany when the RAF was active there. So yes, I'm not getting scared by what they do.
Let's put it this way: what do you think when you read of another gun death? With over 10,000 gun deaths a year in the US you've probably gotten used to it. While over here every gun incident is still big news (though it's getting less with more criminal shootings occuring year over year).
Comment has been collapsed.
We sadly have a long and bloody terrorist experience here in Spain. We are not scared as you are not scared knowing someday you will die. You just live and cry when something like this happens.
Comment has been collapsed.
I know it's not France or Germany, but there has been another terrorist attack with a van. There are 13 deads and the terrorist run away. These days that city is full of tourists, if you have someone close there, please make sure that person is okay.
Another atack in Finland :( Check the last comments for more info. I'm not finding any information relatable or with some truth
Comment has been collapsed.