Foiled Canadian massacre "not terrorism"

[expert]

There was no link to terrorism, Peter McKay, the police and justice minister, announced on Saturday.

“This appeared to be a group of murderous misfits that were ... prepared to wreak havoc and mayhem on our community,” he said.

“The attack does not appear to have been culturally motivated, and is therefore not linked to terrorism.”

Two charged after Canadian police foil Valentine's Day mass murder plot - Americas - World - The Independent

In other words, is it terrorism only if it's linked to Islam? Makes me wonder if the Mullahs are right: the war on terror is actually a war against Islam.

On the other hand there a lone shooter in Copenhagen was a terrorist act.

Investigator Jorgen Skov told reporters that “nothing at this point suggests there were other perpetrators” in the two shootings that had also wounded five police officers.

Denmark’s prime minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt described the first shooting, which bore similarities to the deadly attacks at the newspaper Charlie Hebdo’s offices, as a terrorist attack.
In a press conference on Sunday, Thorning Schmidt said: "Denmark has been hit by terror.

"We do not know the motive for the alleged perpetrator's actions, but we know that there are forces that want to hurt Denmark. They want to rebuke our freedom of speech."

Copenhagen shootings: Police shoot dead suspect after two deadly attacks on a cafe and synagogue - Europe - World - The Independent

So are we supposed to tell the Mullahs?

 

[TankMan]

It's already been established that only Muslims can be declared terrorists. If a non-Muslim does something, it's either a 'lone wolf', 'mentally unbalanced' or a 'parking dispute' but when the same crime in the same fashion is committed by a Muslim it is instantly declared to be terrorism and part of some global Muslim agenda for which all 1.7 billion Muslims have to apologize.

And yes, I too have been repeating this over and over again - that westerners themselves are constantly supporting the Mullah narrative and giving them ammunition. From drone strikes to media campaigns, practically everything they do helps terrorists propagate their narrative and gain recruits.

 

[flamer84]

It's already been established that only Muslims can be declared terrorists. If a non-Muslim does something, it's either a 'lone wolf', 'mentally unbalanced' or a 'parking dispute' but when the same crime in the same fashion is committed by a Muslim it is instantly declared to be terrorism and part of some global Muslim agenda for which all 1.7 billion Muslims have to apologize.

And yes, I too have been repeating this over and over again - that westerners themselves are constantly supporting the Mullah narrative and giving them ammunition. From drone strikes to media campaigns, practically everything they do helps terrorists propagate their narrative and gain recruits.

How can there be a comparison ?

Are they part of a larger community who permanently,for years threathen to commit mass murder on Valentines Day ? Do we live with the risk of such people committing terror attacks on Valentines in Denmark,France,Italy,California,Canada,Madrid ?

Ok,so i see you and others cling on a to a name.So,we will call these 2 loonatics terrorists.What now? They're arrested them,we're in the clear as to" Valentine Day haters terror organisation" but in the same time only God knows how many radical islamists are ready to pick up a gun,blow himself up,chop an innocent on the street.And how are you moderate ,sane muslims trying to stop this ? By constantly posing as victims which ofcourse ,in turn,turns more people into radicals because having a sense on entitlement and constant victimhood always pushes people away.What was the reaction after Charles Hebdo ? There was condemnation ofcourse but the very next minute,the very next minute there was victimhood mentality ,even worse,there was apologism for the murders. We saw it in here,we saw it out there,furiously attacking free speech,attacking the memory of those slain by mad men,accompanied ofc by "altough we do not agree with the murder...",bla,bla which frankly is a spit in the memory of those killed.

 

[TankMan]

How can there be a comparison ?

Are they part of a larger community who permanently,for years threathen to commit mass murder on Valentines Day ? Do we live with the risk of such people committing terror attacks on Valentines in Denmark,France,Italy,California,Canada,Madrid ?

Ok,so i see you and others cling on a to a name.So,we will call these 2 loonatics terrorists.What now? They're arrested them,we're in the clear as to" Valentine Day haters terror organisation" but in the same time only God knows how many radical islamists are ready to pick up a gun,blow himself up,chop an innocent on the street.

Post was meant to be general, not specific to this valentines day massacre - the OP's questions were general, thus the response should be general.

And how are you moderate ,sane muslims trying to stop this ?

We are trying to stop this by fighting the terrorist narrative, protesting, holding seminars, making and distributing pamphlets, writing letters and generally just shouting at the top of our lungs, along with actively fighting them militarily and pushing for a crackdown against terrorist sympathizers, their funding and their hate speech, which is currently being enforced to a reasonable extent in my country at least. Of course, that is not to say that there are no problems among Muslims, there certainly are - which is why all of the above has to be done in the first place.

By constantly posing as victims which ofcourse

The majority of victims of terrorism are in fact Muslims. That's a fact, nothing can change it.

,in turn,turns more people into radicals because having a sense on entitlement and constant victimhood always pushes people away.

If victims of terrorism turn into terrorists themselves to defend themselves or in a pursuit of revenge, it is certainly a bad thing but it is a reasonable and expected reaction.

Like the Kurds for example, fighting ISIS in a guerilla/'terrorist' fashion. I don't know what other 'victims' who 'turn into radicals' you may be talking about. If you're referring to people who join terrorists because they feel that the terrorist narrative is right and the West is in fact doing what the terrorists say they're doing, then that's precisely what I was talking about.

No one is 'posing' as victims. People are victims. People who get their homes blown up in drone attacks or 'collateral damage' are actually victims. What I am saying is that the west needs to either stop making them victims or stop behaving as if they (West) are very moral people after making said people victims.

What was the reaction after Charles Hebdo ? There was condemnation ofcourse but the very next minute,the very next minute there was victimhood mentality ,even worse,there was apologism for the murders. We saw it in here,we saw it out there,furiously attacking free speech,attacking the memory of those slain by mad men,accompanied ofc by "altough we do not agree with the murder...",bla,bla which frankly is a spit in the memory of those killed.

Because Muslims are put in such a position by you people. A position in which we have to either endorse the insult of our religion or be declared 'apologists'. What's wrong with saying 'We don't agree with the murders but we don't agree with you making fun of our sacred beliefs either'?

That's another part of the terrorist narrative that you are currently propagating - 'us vs them'. What you are saying is ''either love Charlie Hebdo and insult your own beliefs or you are spitting on the victims and are terrorist apologists and against us''.

Now obviously terrorists are going to cash on that opportunity by saying that the west wants to force Muslims to abandon their beliefs, and honestly it does feel like that sometimes. Does that mean I will now support terrorists? No, never, because they are completely wrong and on an extreme side. Aside from common sense and decency, our religion is against that and our Prophet explicitly told us ''do not be extremists''

"Religion is very easy and whoever overburdens himself in his religion will not be able to continue in that way. So do not be extremists, but try to be near to perfection and receive the good tidings that you will be rewarded." [Sahih Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 2, Number 38]

A good article if you're interested: Islam's Antidote to Extremism - MuslimMatters.org

 

[flamer84]

Post was meant to be general, not specific to this valentines day massacre - the OP's questions were general, thus the response should be general.

But this discussion goes into particulars.What would have changed if 2-3 nutsacks who knew each other on the internet and decided to kill people would have been labeled terrorists ? Will some of these isolated incidents make you feel better because others are labeled terrorists to ? If that's the case i'd be happy to provide a list of non islamic affiliated terror organisations.

We are trying to stop this by fighting the terrorist narrative, protesting, holding seminars, making and distributing pamphlets, writing letters and generally just shouting at the top of our lungs, along with actively fighting them militarily and pushing for a crackdown against terrorist sympathizers, their funding and their hate speech, which is currently being enforced to a reasonable extent in my country at least.

And yet subtly encourage them by backing the narative of people being offended by cartoons,that muslim are discriminated and targeted-Truth be told ,with their sinagogues,cultural centers,schools under attack,Jews are the ones attacked in Europe.

The majority of victims of terrorism are in fact Muslims. That's a fact, nothing can change it.

In the ME,in A'stan,Pakistan,yes.Never challenged that.-their ancient hatred,their violence in the name of religion is being imported by some muslims in Europe.They are not under attack in here,they're the ones attacking.

If victims of terrorism turn into terrorists themselves to defend themselves or in a pursuit of revenge, it is certainly a bad thing but it is a reasonable and expected reaction.

Like the Kurds for example, fighting ISIS in a guerilla/'terrorist' fashion. I don't know what other 'victims' who 'turn into radicals' you may be talking about. If you're referring to people who join terrorists because they feel that the terrorist narrative is right and the West is in fact doing what the terrorists say they're doing, then that's precisely what I was talking about.

No one is 'posing' as victims. People are victims. People who get their homes blown up in drone attacks or 'collateral damage' are actually victims. What I am saying is that the west needs to either stop making them victims or stop behaving as if they (West) are very moral people after making said people victims.

You see,in a logical way i can understand if some pissed of Iraqi comes and commits a terror act in Europe.What i can't understand is muslims who are citizens in here and turn against their own countries.This shows a greater loyalty to their religion than their country,nevermind that the fact that many simply don't see their European host states as "their country".

Because Muslims are put in such a position by you people. A position in which we have to either endorse the insult of our religion or be declared 'apologists'. What's wrong with saying 'We don't agree with the murders but we don't agree with you making fun of our sacred beliefs either'?

That's another part of the terrorist narrative that you are currently propagating - 'us vs them'. What you are saying is ''either love Charlie Hebdo and insult your own beliefs or you are spitting on the victims and are terrorist apologists and against us''.

Now obviously terrorists are going to cash on that opportunity by saying that the west wants to force Muslims to abandon their beliefs, and honestly it does feel like that sometimes. Does that mean I will now support terrorists? No, never, because they are completely wrong and on an extreme side. Aside from common sense and decency, our religion is against that and our Prophet explicitly told us ''do not be extremists''

"Religion is very easy and whoever overburdens himself in his religion will not be able to continue in that way. So do not be extremists, but try to be near to perfection and receive the good tidings that you will be rewarded." [Sahih Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 2, Number 38]

A good article if you're interested: Islam's Antidote to Extremism - MuslimMatters.org

Can't you understand that many people felt insulted by Charlie Hebdo types without being muslims (me included) ? But this is the society we live in,this is the society that we've built ,this is the society that muslims came to live in.If you feel that you're being pushed,how do you think that the majority feels when seeing people putting their own values against the society established here in Europe ?

 

[TankMan]

But this discussion goes into particulars.What would have changed if 2-3 nutsacks who knew each other on the internet and decided to kill people would have been labeled terrorists ? Will some of these isolated incidents make you feel better because others are labeled terrorists to ? If that's the case i'd be happy to provide a list of non islamic affiliated terror organisations.

The false idea that 'all terrorists are Muslims' would've been eliminated, and the 'us vs them' narrative would be less dominant.

And yet subtly encourage them by backing the narative of people being offended by cartoons

I am offended by the cartoons. To say that I am encouraging terrorists because of that, despite all the efforts I make against terrorists, is absurd.

that muslim are discriminated and targeted

No - it's that Muslims are being distanced and demonized as a result of both terrorist activities and Western reactions + politics.

their ancient hatred,their violence in the name of religion

You mean like the crusades, the inter-denomination warfare among Christians, the whole burning witches period and the constant, subsequent warfare? This is not specific to them. In ancient times, it used to be everywhere. Thus, it is irrelevant.

They are not under attack in here,they're the ones attacking.

Bull. You mean the over 50,000 Pakistani civilians and 20,000 soldiers killed fighting the politically-motivated and justified by religion war are 'the ones attacking'. Totally incorrect.

You see,in a logical way i can understand if some pissed of Iraqi comes and commits a terror act in Europe.What i can't understand is muslims who are citizens in here and turn against their own countries.This shows a greater loyalty to their religion than their country,nevermind that the fact that many simply don't see their European host states as "their country".

It's not religion. As I have proven before, it is not their religion that makes them turn against their own countries. They are not loyal to their religion either. All they are loyal to are misplaced political beliefs and general psychopathy.

Can't you understand that many people felt insulted by Charlie Hebdo types without being muslims (me included) ? But this is the society we live in,this is the society that we've built ,this is the society that muslims came to live in.If you feel that you're being pushed,how do you think that the majority feels when seeing people putting their own values against the society established here in Europe ?

I can understand that. And I am not opposing the society you have built either. All I am saying is : stop reacting in the way the terrorists want you to. It may help the political agenda of a few countries but it does not help the normal people, Muslim or not, anywhere.
I hope you understand.

 

[Steve781]

Was Jack The Ripper a terrorist? If it's not political it's not terrorism.

 

[Northern lights]