Brussels Terrorist Attack: ISIS Claims Responsibility

[Kriga]

So why don't we educate them instead of take such a hardline rhetoric against them? Respect their religion as you would to a Christian, and tensions will diffuse. Of course, there are aspects of the QU'ran that appear to be very backwards, but it applies for every religion as well. When handling religion, we must respect the rights of others to worship a different God. But at the same time, we should not compromise secular and humanist values to appease them.

You disarm religion by educating its followers to evolve into a higher state of learning and perception of the world.

Uh-huh. And how do we educate a bunch of people on another continent? They need to take the steps to improve their own countries. And half of the time they don't even want to change their ass-backwards ways.

Which is why we should stop supporting these backward governments. We must pressure them as much as we can. Sadly, the West won't ever do that. The least we can do, is create a respectful atmosphere for Muslim citizens in European countries, but at the same time, slowly bring them out of their traditional perception of the world.

[Farnhamia]

At least Dubya had good writers. Everything Gauth said is straight out of the wannabe liberal snark trash can. Fucking Kieth Olbermann wouldn't touch those jokes.

They're not even jokes. They're just snarky comments. The only thing he actually contributes to threads is endless snarky remarks. You can tell which threads he's in just by the smell of pure shit.

*** Warned for flaming. ***

[Robert Bork]

I'm not going to say I have all the answers in respect to that. There are a lot of Muslim thinkers who agree with me who would be the best at explaining that (I'm thinking of Maajid Nawaz). All I know is that we won't make any progress if we can't be honest about the problems with Islam without being called Islamaphobes.

Fair enough - I wouldn't claim to either.

And I would, perhaps, agree that an honest discussion is frustratingly elusive. I might add, that this is both due to an extreme branch of the liberal left, and to bigoted segments of society, which both would seek to impose personal biases instead of an honest discussion, but the point remains. Secondly, what would such a discussion achieve? Are you thinking it would lead to policy options, or a changing of attitudes, either within or outside muslim communities in western nations?

Both.

We need policies to deradicalize. That's impeded if people's radical Islamist beliefs are protected under the guise of multiculturalism. We need policies that protect Western democracy and attitudes that call out illiberal bullshit as illiberal bullshit.

[Alyakia]

http://i.imgur.com/qdHEXax.jpg

just found this image. should be good reading for all our experts on european terrorism in this thread.

[Geilinor]

http://i.imgur.com/qdHEXax.jpg

just found this image. should be good reading for all our experts on european terrorism in this thread.

Most of those deaths were because of The Troubles in Northern Ireland and then the ETA. Those are old problems that were solved. Now there's a new one.

[Kriga]

Fair enough - I wouldn't claim to either.

And I would, perhaps, agree that an honest discussion is frustratingly elusive. I might add, that this is both due to an extreme branch of the liberal left, and to bigoted segments of society, which both would seek to impose personal biases instead of an honest discussion, but the point remains. Secondly, what would such a discussion achieve? Are you thinking it would lead to policy options, or a changing of attitudes, either within or outside muslim communities in western nations?

Both.

We need policies to deradicalize. That's impeded if people's radical Islamist beliefs are protected under the guise of multiculturalism. We need policies that protect Western democracy and attitudes that call out illiberal bullshit as illiberal bullshit.

^^This. People should have the right to criticise any religion, but it should be constructive and not inflammatory. Problem is, with the rise of islamophobia, people tend to think that criticism is islamophobic, blocking any moves to liberalise the traditionalist Muslims in Europe.

[Unified Governments]

Uh-huh. And how do we educate a bunch of people on another continent? They need to take the steps to improve their own countries. And half of the time they don't even want to change their ass-backwards ways.

We're talking about Muslims in Europe. Of course we won't be educating everyone in the Middle East and North Africa.

And I'm telling you they don't want to change. They move to these countries, they form their own little Muslim communities, and they never fucking change. There's no integration. They stick to their own ass-backwards culture.

[Napkiraly]

http://i.imgur.com/qdHEXax.jpg

just found this image. should be good reading for all our experts on european terrorism in this thread.

Most of those deaths were because of The Troubles in Northern Ireland and then the ETA. Those are old problems that were solved. Now there's a new one.

^This pretty much. I could use a similar graph showing how Germans have killed more Europeans in the last century than Islamic terrorism has. But we're no longer under threat of a German war machine. New problems arise which require different strategies and solutions. Because one problem was more bloody doesn't delegitimize the new problem or its solutions if it was reached in a different way.

[Benxboro]

We're talking about Muslims in Europe. Of course we won't be educating everyone in the Middle East and North Africa.

And I'm telling you they don't want to change. They move to these countries, they form their own little Muslim communities, and they never fucking change. There's no integration. They stick to their own ass-backwards culture.

Then we send them to the Middle East to have them learn about the 30 Years War. I'm just saying that if they want to go out and engage in takfirism with guns, I will not only not stop them, but encourage others to help them in their activities until they learn that takfirism is bad.

[Valaran]

Fair enough - I wouldn't claim to either.

And I would, perhaps, agree that an honest discussion is frustratingly elusive. I might add, that this is both due to an extreme branch of the liberal left, and to bigoted segments of society, which both would seek to impose personal biases instead of an honest discussion, but the point remains. Secondly, what would such a discussion achieve? Are you thinking it would lead to policy options, or a changing of attitudes, either within or outside muslim communities in western nations?

Both.

We need policies to deradicalize. That's impeded if people's radical Islamist beliefs are protected under the guise of multiculturalism. We need policies that protect Western democracy and attitudes that call out illiberal bullshit as illiberal bullshit.

ok. I suppose my concern is that such a discussion would simply be hijacked by one of many various groups with an axe to grind (let alone the possibility for misinformation and the opportunity for sudden incidents to harden/change opinions). That being said, the same is happening now, so maybe this is needed.

Specifically: Assimilation policies? Educational policies? uh, migration policies?
My caveat with this, is the time that these policies will need to have an effect - patience isn't infinite, and often, a frightened public wants immediate results, which many politicians will pander to. It truly takes someone with vision and insight to lead public opinion, rather than follow its fears and prejudices (also to bear the cost of doing those things), and perhaps no such figures can be found.

[Alyakia]

Most of those deaths were because of The Troubles in Northern Ireland and then the ETA. Those are old problems that were solved. Now there's a new one.

^This pretty much. I could use a similar graph showing how Germans have killed more Europeans in the last century than Islamic terrorism has. But we're no longer under threat of a German war machine. New problems arise which require different strategies and solutions. Because one problem was more bloody doesn't delegitimize the new problem or its solutions if it was reached in a different way.

the police services and the people that have died recently appear to disagree with your comparison and implication we are no longer under threat from separatist terrorism

[Valaran]

^This pretty much. I could use a similar graph showing how Germans have killed more Europeans in the last century than Islamic terrorism has. But we're no longer under threat of a German war machine. New problems arise which require different strategies and solutions. Because one problem was more bloody doesn't delegitimize the new problem or its solutions if it was reached in a different way.

the police services and the people that have died recently appear to disagree with your comparison and implication we are no longer under threat from separatist terrorism

Which separatist terrorists are you referring to here?

The latest non-jihadi related terrorist deaths I could find was the 2012 Brindisi School Bombings, but iirc, those won't separatist related. Before that, you have to go to 2010. Oh and an IRA-offshoot related killing, but that was the only one for at least 5 years. The threat has clearly receded, and is certainly minimal compared to islamic fundamentalist terrorism.

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

http://i.imgur.com/qdHEXax.jpg

just found this image. should be good reading for all our experts on european terrorism in this thread.

So, terrorism in the EU is going down.

That's great!

[YoriZ]

Your assertion seems similarly ridiculous to me, without any evidence. You can hold all the opinion you want, but what matters is the facts. And we simply don't have enough facts to know whether Moroccans do commit more crimes than Dutch nationals, or whether the justice and police systems are predisposed to charge them more frequently, or whether they are simply picked up more often because of a greater focus, or a hundred other things, because nobody's really keen to look into policing practices, or judgements, and we don't have many studies in this area.

We have deductive reasoning.

Everybody knows that poverty and lack of education lead to crime. We can call of the known factors of crime "Y".

If Group A has more of Y than Group B, then consequently, they will have more crime.

Moroccans have more of Y than the general population of the Dutch.

Thus, they commit more crime.

Actually, you're deductive reasoning is false.

Let's take the year 2014 in the Netherlands.

In quantitative numbers, in 2014 162.000 persons were accused of having commited a crime.
A number of 85.000 so called autochtoon persons (Dutch) were accused of commiting crime (a small majority of 52,5% of total accused persons).
Western allochtoon persons (European citizens residing in the Netherlands) were good for 26.000 accused people (16% of total accused persons).
Non-western allochtoon persons (a fancy word for strangers) were good for 51.000 accused people (31,5% of total accused persons).
This last group comprising 12.500 accused Marrocans (7,7% of total accused persons).
Conclusion: Most crimes are committed by Dutch citizens, in more than half of the cases, a Dutch person is the accused. In less than one out of every ten cases, a Marrocan is the accused.

Of course, I'm not neglecting the fact that in relative numbers, percentiles, strangers and in particular Marrocans do show more chance to be accused of crime. But even here, we are arguing about a range of difference from 1% for Dutch up to 4% of Maroccans (and even 5% of Antillians) being accused of committing crime.

Now the deductive part.

If the problem you want to solve is preventing criminality from happening, it will be more rewarding to fight crime in general, than to focus on preventing the criminality from a rather small group of 7,7% the total.

The 2,25% of the population of the Netherlands that is Maroccan is held responsible for 7,7% of committed crimes. The 78,5% of the population of the Netherlands that is Dutch is held accountable for committing 52,5% of all committed crimes. Crime is prohibited anyway, so what is the point? Are we gonna write extra legislation to prohibit a race specific 2,25% of the population to comit crime? It comes down to plain racism.

You cannot abuse the numbers, it has no sense. If you make it relative, than you can also come up with the fact that the Dutch are 7 times as much held responsible for committing a crime than the Maroccans are (52,5% of the cases against 7,7%). You see, actually it is the Dutch committing more crime, Marrocans are merely picking up the pace. In the year 2012 19,4% of the victims of crime were Dutch whereas 26,9% of the victims were Marrocans. So actually most crimes are committed by Dutch and it is the Maroccans that have the highest chance of becoming a victim of crime (7,5% more chance, we definitively should protect the Maroccan community better).

If you want less crime: focus on fighting crime instead of polarising groups against each other.
Certainly in Europe, we know the consequeces of polarisations and solutions based on race (entloesung).

[Napkiraly]

^This pretty much. I could use a similar graph showing how Germans have killed more Europeans in the last century than Islamic terrorism has. But we're no longer under threat of a German war machine. New problems arise which require different strategies and solutions. Because one problem was more bloody doesn't delegitimize the new problem or its solutions if it was reached in a different way.

the police services and the people that have died recently appear to disagree with your comparison and implication we are no longer under threat from separatist terrorism

I didn't say that Europe was completely no longer threatened by separatist terrorism now did I? But Islamic terrorism is by far the deadliest over the past decade and a half. http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2015/01/daily-chart-8 This isn't including Paris and now Brussels. For such a small number, it causes a lot of damage.

[Napkiraly]

the police services and the people that have died recently appear to disagree with your comparison and implication we are no longer under threat from separatist terrorism

Which separatist terrorists are you referring to here?

There are still dissident Irish republican groups around. ETA only declared a ceasefire in 2011.

[Valaran]

Which separatist terrorists are you referring to here?

There are still dissident Irish republican groups around. ETA only declared a ceasefire in 2011.

But very few recent deaths from either, as I understand.

[Vassenor]

There are still dissident Irish republican groups around. ETA only declared a ceasefire in 2011.

But very few recent deaths from either, as I understand.

Earlier this month, in fact.

[Pope Joan]

NPR and BBC: "Belgium is at fault; they have no gun control laws."

Excuse me? Did I miss the part where guns were used in these attacks?

What has the one got to do with the other?

[Unified Governments]

But very few recent deaths from either, as I understand.

Earlier this month, in fact.

Jesus. I thought that fighting had stopped long ago. But I'm not too well versed on the situation there.

[Esceen]

But very few recent deaths from either, as I understand.

Earlier this month, in fact.

Very few recent deaths. That wasn't a death if I'm reading correctly

[Unified Governments]

NPR and BBC: "Belgium is at fault; they have no gun control laws."

Excuse me? Did I miss the part where guns were used in these attacks?

What has the one got to do with the other?

Bombs are a form of gun, doncha know.

[Valaran]

But very few recent deaths from either, as I understand.

Earlier this month, in fact.

That's still clearly less of an issue compared to Islamic terrorism. Obviously that means fuck all to the victim, but what is your point here, exactly? That the IRA, or some offshoot, are poised to launch another massive terror related campaign? I doubt it. But you know who is? IS.

In the 80s the IRA were bombing right across the UK. That is far worse compared to the current situation of separatist terrorism, which is what Napi was suggesting.

[Vassenor]

Earlier this month, in fact.

Very few recent deaths. That wasn't a death if I'm reading correctly

Nope, he died.

[Napkiraly]

There are still dissident Irish republican groups around. ETA only declared a ceasefire in 2011.

But very few recent deaths from either, as I understand.

Well the ETA hasn't been active in about 5 years and I'm not aware of any splinter groups that have continued on. Dissident republicans will flare up a bit once in awhile.

IIRC as well, religious based terrorism has a low amount of successful attacks but takes up a rather big chunk in arrests and foiled attacks.