Brussels Terrorist Attack: ISIS Claims Responsibility

[Robert Bork]

Because you have a cataract.

No.

It just looks too much like Trump retweeting 'X group causes Y% crime'

And then everyone goes 'No.'

....

Ok?

[Kriga]

Education is the key to tackling radical extremists. With secularism, we can break the boundaries of traditional influence and create an evolution in the way people from religious backgrounds see life. That does mean we should outright condemn and destroy religion. Religion has its uses, however old it has become. But, still, if we are going to progress as a species, man must evolve. For years, politicians, dictators, bigots and racists have asserted that force will change things. But it does not.

The Fascists in Germany tried force, the Communists in Russia tried force. It all failed. Force has shown time and time again that it does not work. Education and enlightenment are what we must use to ensure that attacks on Europe and the rest of the world, by religious groups that seek to take us back to the dark ages, do not happen again.

In that case, i do believe that education is the way forward.

What about faith schools then? A plethora of Madrasa's could 'lock in' religious views, so to speak. Similarly, whatever one teaches at school, attitudes at home could still instil certain non-secular values, for instance. Let alone the segregation issues limiting exposure. And finally, education is fine, but it has to be good education, which is not guaranteed, espcially in economically deprived areas. I strongly agree with you that education is the right way, but I worry that it is harder to implement than assumed.

The idea of secularism is the separation of religion from matters regarding the state. As far as many countries are concerned, education should be part of the state and secular organisations, not at the hands of religious faith schools. Were it up to me, faith schools would be shut down. Religion should only be confined to sermons and worship. Religion should never, ever mix with politics. History as taught us that.

[Shaggy Dog Story]

There are statistical studies that do indicate that poverty is a leading factor in considering whether one will commit a crime, be convicted of a crime, and also importantly, be victimized by a crime.

Factor poverty out of the equation and there is no racial, ethnic, or religious "propensity" towards crime.

And also the likelihood of people turning to radicalization as an escape or chance at mobility.

Any disadvantaged group can be swayed towards radicalism. I said this earlier in the thread but we should not be mistaken into thinking ISIS is a terrorist group. It's a political group. Terrorism is a tool utilized to solicit stronger clamp downs on Muslim communities and to stir up anti-Islamic sentiment that they then use to drive recruitment.

[The Lone Alliance]

Nothing wrong with playing into the hands of a terrorist organization that blatantly stated they want the West to treat Muslims like such utter shits that they themselves can be seen as the only salvation.

You know this argument is silly because everyone knows that if Muslims as a whole declared war on the entire world and joined ISIS the only thing that would happen is the rest of the world would promptly declare war on all 1.5 billion Muslims on the planet and most likely wipe Islam off the face of the planet in a war that would make world war 2 look like a skirmish.

So unless ISIS secret plan is to blow up the earth I can't see this being their motive.

[Mugrul]

You aren't familiar with Geert Wilders' party platform and reliance on rhetoric then.

Geert Wilders' party actually has a pretty good manifesto compared to that of the imbeciles in the Dutch Labour Party, GreenLeft etc.
I don't like his economic policies though

What good is to come by prohibiting the Quran?

[Esceen]

http://imgur.com/a/qEwdO

Brussels happening: Coincidence???

[Gauthier]

Geert Wilders' party actually has a pretty good manifesto compared to that of the imbeciles in the Dutch Labour Party, GreenLeft etc.
I don't like his economic policies though

What good is to come by prohibiting the Quran?

World peace, aliens offering advanced technologies, extinct species spontaneously coming back.

[Valaran]

What about faith schools then? A plethora of Madrasa's could 'lock in' religious views, so to speak. Similarly, whatever one teaches at school, attitudes at home could still instil certain non-secular values, for instance. Let alone the segregation issues limiting exposure. And finally, education is fine, but it has to be good education, which is not guaranteed, espcially in economically deprived areas. I strongly agree with you that education is the right way, but I worry that it is harder to implement than assumed.

The idea of secularism is the separation of religion from matters regarding the state. As far as many countries are concerned, education should be part of the state and secular organisations, not at the hands of religious faith schools. Were it up to me, faith schools would be shut down. Religion should only be confined to sermons and worship. Religion should never, ever mix with politics. History as taught us that.

No worries. I feel that I would condone faith schools on some level, simply as I'd be a hypocrite if I said otherwise, but I see your reasoning. My issue then is what about blurred areas of education, like after school/sermon classes or informal (and so unregulated) schooling in one's religion. Still quite influential on attitudes, and harder to root out if one is opposed to it.

Religion should never, ever mix with politics. History as taught us that.

What do you make of the US presidential oaths then?

[Luminesa]

I'd have hoped for shorter than eventually - like in the 1-5 day range. There are clearly well funded and well organised cells still operational.

Do I assume correctly that you think the introduction of secular influences would be through education, or is there another method you had in mind?
And aside from that, will there be greater monitoring of potential radicalised persons there? Or general initiatives to tackle the 'regular' issues of poverty, crime and so forth?

Education is the key to tackling radical extremists. With secularism, we can break the boundaries of traditional influence and create an evolution in the way people from religious backgrounds see life. That does mean we should outright condemn and destroy religion. Religion has its uses, however old it has become. But, still, if we are going to progress as a species, man must evolve. For years, politicians, dictators, bigots and racists have asserted that force will change things. But it does not.

The Fascists in Germany tried force, the Communists in Russia tried force. It all failed. Force has shown time and time again that it does not work. Education and enlightenment are what we must use to ensure that attacks on Europe and the rest of the world, by religious groups that seek to take us back to the dark ages, do not happen again.

In that case, i do believe that education is the way forward.

No, we should not try to destroy religion. Religion has existed since the beginning of civilization, and it has majorly built the cultures of civilizations around the world. It was Christianity that guided most of the world through the Dark Ages, anyway. Of course we need to get rid of radicalism. However, that does not mean destroying religion. It means tackling the economic and social situations (poverty, lack of proper education, as you just mentioned, the lack of efficient communication, etc.) that allow for radicalism and hatred to take root in society. If you try to destroy religion itself, I can guarantee you, you're going to end-up destroying a lot more than you're going to be building.

[Riyahd]

Once again, the actions of an insane few slander the name of Islam and Allah, like the KKK slanders Christianity, and the Stalinists slander Communism...

[Zeinbrad]

http://imgur.com/a/qEwdO

Brussels happening: Coincidence???

I see a lot of Orthodox Jews walking in a metro station.

[Benxboro]

I think we can all agree that the Middle East is broken. It's near-irreparable.

It's quite fixable.

The people who live there just need to want to fix it.

Which is the crux of the problem really. Muslims in the middle east are obsessed with their own sense of powerlessness; in every shadow the Saudi's see Iranians, the Iranians see Americans, Egyptians see the Brotherhood, Turks see the PKK, Palestinians see Jews, Assad sees Islamists and ISIS sees unbelievers. And that is really only scratching the surface of their respective rabbit holes. They find the hand of the enemy everywhere and see proof of the nefarious plots against them in every event. Nothing is a coincidence, everything was according to [X]'s plan. People look at their leaders and see stooges. Leaders look at that their people and see enemy agents.

Naturally like the poor paranoid schizophrenic, when you are convinced you are helpless because everything is being controlled by evil hands you do in fact become powerless to effect anything at all. Eventually you even stop feeling responsible for what you do: Sentenced 683 people to death at once? The Brotherhood will destroy Egypt this is national security! Execute a helpless boy in the street? He was an unbeliever whose sales pitch insulted the prophet!

Just did what you had to do.

In reality the cycle of violence and oppression can only be sustained as long as the people within it choose to continue. It is not the inevitable consequence of anything. It is not, and cannot, be imposed on them from outside. "Instability" is thrown around a lot but this is simply nonsense. Unlike jenga blocks people can choose. They cannot choose what happens to them but they can choose how they respond to it. The only casual chain between "deposing Saddam in 2003" and "burning people in cages in Syria years later" is of choices freely made.

But how do you get people who are absolutely convinced they had no choice to realize they were the ones making the choices all along, and the terrible situation they find themselves in is by and large their own fault, not the product of nefarious CIA/Jewish/Saudi/Iranian/Brotherhood/Kurdish/Terrorist/Infidel plots? The Arab spring seemed like it could finally be the time when Arabs would finally see through the delusions and seize control of their own lives, but it's long been drowned in blood. A shame really.

Realistically we shouldn't expect much soon. After all it wasn't until Europeans opened their eyes one fine day in 1945 and found their whole world in ashes that they began to understand they were not simply prisoners of great power politics, but that they had chosen that path and walked it of their own free will.

Burning it to the ground because they're dumbfucks.
*shrug* Praise Chaos.

[Riyahd]

Education is the key to tackling radical extremists. With secularism, we can break the boundaries of traditional influence and create an evolution in the way people from religious backgrounds see life. That does mean we should outright condemn and destroy religion. Religion has its uses, however old it has become. But, still, if we are going to progress as a species, man must evolve. For years, politicians, dictators, bigots and racists have asserted that force will change things. But it does not.

The Fascists in Germany tried force, the Communists in Russia tried force. It all failed. Force has shown time and time again that it does not work. Education and enlightenment are what we must use to ensure that attacks on Europe and the rest of the world, by religious groups that seek to take us back to the dark ages, do not happen again.

In that case, i do believe that education is the way forward.

No, we should not try to destroy religion. Religion has existed since the beginning of civilization, and it has majorly built the cultures of civilizations around the world. It was Christianity that guided most of the world through the Dark Ages, anyway. Of course we need to get rid of radicalism. However, that does not mean destroying religion. It means tackling the economic and social situations (poverty, lack of proper education, as you just mentioned, the lack of efficient communication, etc.) that allow for radicalism and hatred to take root in society. If you try to destroy religion itself, I can guarantee you, you're going to end-up destroying a lot more than you're going to be building.

*Richard Dawkins enters the room* "I'm afraid you're quite wrong, sir. If you'll refer to chapter 3 of my book, The God Delusion..."

((Just making a joke, not representing an opinion))

[Napkiraly]

http://imgur.com/a/qEwdO

Brussels happening: Coincidence???

I see a lot of Orthodox Jews walking in a metro station.

Sad thing is, someone will probably take this seriously and believe that Mossad is behind this attack.

[PaNTuXIa]

What good is to come by prohibiting the Quran?

World peace, aliens offering advanced technologies, extinct species spontaneously coming back.

Wait, is that supposed to be a joke?

[Esceen]

I see a lot of Orthodox Jews walking in a metro station.

Sad thing is, someone will probably take this seriously and believe that Mossad is behind this attack.

AKA /pol/

[Valaran]

World peace, aliens offering advanced technologies, extinct species spontaneously coming back.

Wait, is that supposed to be a joke?

No - I want my dinosaurs. yeah, Gauth is joking

[Zeinbrad]

I see a lot of Orthodox Jews walking in a metro station.

Sad thing is, someone will probably take this seriously and believe that Mossad is behind this attack.

Ignoring that if the Mossad did it, they would probably not dress up as Orthodox Jews.

[Robert Bork]

World peace, aliens offering advanced technologies, extinct species spontaneously coming back.

Wait, is that supposed to be a joke?

Sadly, yes.

[Kriga]

The idea of secularism is the separation of religion from matters regarding the state. As far as many countries are concerned, education should be part of the state and secular organisations, not at the hands of religious faith schools. Were it up to me, faith schools would be shut down. Religion should only be confined to sermons and worship. Religion should never, ever mix with politics. History as taught us that.

No worries. I feel that I would condone faith schools on some level, simply as I'd be a hypocrite if I said otherwise, but I see your reasoning. My issue then is what about blurred areas of education, like after school/sermon classes or informal (and so unregulated) schooling in one's religion. Still quite influential on attitudes, and harder to root out if one is opposed to it.

Religion should never, ever mix with politics. History as taught us that.

What do you make of the US presidential oaths then?

I find the U.S' dedication to mixing religion with politics ludicrous and dangerous. It has no basis, and tends to reinforce this myth that America is a 'Christian country,' when the constitution specifically says that no religious belief should be melded with the country's political culture. Unfortunately, that's what happens when you put puritans in charge of a government.

In terms of issues like 'sermons,' we simply need to create a culture where school is only meant for study, learning and free thinking. Those who oppose restrictions on sermons at school are staunch traditionalists who want to go back to the way things were. They'll die out soon, and schooling will be less focused on pomp and glorification of religion, and more focused on what our children should learn.

[Valaran]

No worries. I feel that I would condone faith schools on some level, simply as I'd be a hypocrite if I said otherwise, but I see your reasoning. My issue then is what about blurred areas of education, like after school/sermon classes or informal (and so unregulated) schooling in one's religion. Still quite influential on attitudes, and harder to root out if one is opposed to it.



What do you make of the US presidential oaths then?

I find the U.S' dedication to mixing religion with politics ludicrous and dangerous. It has no basis, and tends to reinforce this myth that America is a 'Christian country,' when the constitution specifically says that no religious belief should be melded with the country's political culture. Unfortunately, that's what happens when you put puritans in charge of a government.

In terms of issues like 'sermons,' we simply need to create a culture where school is only meant for study, learning and free thinking. Those who oppose restrictions on sermons at school are staunch traditionalists who want to go back to the way things were. They'll die out soon, and schooling will be less focused on pomp and glorification of religion, and more focused on what our children should learn.

Fair enough.

Oh I meant sermons at places of religious veneration - Sorry for the confusion!

[Gauthier]

Wait, is that supposed to be a joke?

Sadly, yes.

Sad that it's not a remote possibility eh?

[PaNTuXIa]

Wait, is that supposed to be a joke?

Sadly, yes.

I thought he might be serious because of his sig.

[Kriga]

Education is the key to tackling radical extremists. With secularism, we can break the boundaries of traditional influence and create an evolution in the way people from religious backgrounds see life. That does mean we should outright condemn and destroy religion. Religion has its uses, however old it has become. But, still, if we are going to progress as a species, man must evolve. For years, politicians, dictators, bigots and racists have asserted that force will change things. But it does not.

The Fascists in Germany tried force, the Communists in Russia tried force. It all failed. Force has shown time and time again that it does not work. Education and enlightenment are what we must use to ensure that attacks on Europe and the rest of the world, by religious groups that seek to take us back to the dark ages, do not happen again.

In that case, i do believe that education is the way forward.

No, we should not try to destroy religion. Religion has existed since the beginning of civilization, and it has majorly built the cultures of civilizations around the world. It was Christianity that guided most of the world through the Dark Ages, anyway. Of course we need to get rid of radicalism. However, that does not mean destroying religion. It means tackling the economic and social situations (poverty, lack of proper education, as you just mentioned, the lack of efficient communication, etc.) that allow for radicalism and hatred to take root in society. If you try to destroy religion itself, I can guarantee you, you're going to end-up destroying a lot more than you're going to be building.

I never said we should destroy religion, but rather, we should limit the influence religion has on politics and social reform. We will be just fine without religious leaders always imposing its own version of how they see the world. The last time we surrendered authority to such a religion, it saw merciless inquisitions, witch-hunts, imprisonment of free-thinkers, and decadence.

Religion has no place in politics. It should stuck to its true purpose: providing a place of worship for those who continue to believe in a religion. Separation of church and state is essential, and i very much wish to see religion as far away from state as possible.

Just look at Iran, Saudi Arabia, America....a fine example of what happens when you put efficiency before faith.

[Robert Bork]

Sadly, yes.

Sad that it's not a remote possibility eh?

No. Sad that you'll never actualize your dream to be a writer for the Seth Meyers show.