Brussels Terrorist Attack: ISIS Claims Responsibility

[Ostroeuropa]

Yes, the bloodline exists.
The current leader of ISIS is a descendent of Mohammed.

No, he's not.

He uses the whole "Abu Bakr" thing as a publicity stunt, but he's not actually descended from Muhammad.

It's not exactly that outlandish a claim. There are many people descended from the Quraysh tribe. It's as vapid a point as declaring yourself a descendent of Charlemagne. (I.E, everyone who has a white person in the last, say, 3 generations of their family tree.)
It's to be excpected that he probably is a descendent of Mohammed. It would be more strange if he wasn't. That's how geneology tends to work. Given enough time, eventually, everyone is your descendent... or noone is.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/com ... rutherford

[Lunalia]

Well, guess that bloodline's going to get eliminated in a hurry.

Anyway, another, more serious issue with one fixed Caliphate is that, even fixed, there is a LOT of landmass in the proposed "one fixed Caliphate". That means a lot of people living within it. Yes, the Vatican guides all Roman Catholics, but the actual landmass taken up by Vatican City (even when you add in the landmass taken up by other buildings owned or rented by the Vatican for cathedrals and Catholic schools and such) is minimal. If you want to live within the area controlled by the Vatican, you can, but if you don't agree with everything the Vatican says, you don't have to abide by it as long as you don't actually live in Vatican City. You can be guided in the case of things you're undecided on, and you are free to blatantly disagree with some teachings.

The proposed one free Caliphate is so large that a LOT of people would have to relocate if they don't agree with everything that this new religious government wants them to do.

Why not just restrain the Caliphate to Mecca and/or Medina?

Turn Mecca and/or Medina into an Islamic Vatican. There you go. Problem solved.

Caliphate's traditionally a country ruled by a Caliph. Unsure if one city ruled by a Caliph will go over well.

[Vassenor]

Here's newsround's guide to the events

Is there a reason you decided to go for the version oriented towards Children when looking for an explanation post?

[Uxupox]

Well, guess that bloodline's going to get eliminated in a hurry.

Anyway, another, more serious issue with one fixed Caliphate is that, even fixed, there is a LOT of landmass in the proposed "one fixed Caliphate". That means a lot of people living within it. Yes, the Vatican guides all Roman Catholics, but the actual landmass taken up by Vatican City (even when you add in the landmass taken up by other buildings owned or rented by the Vatican for cathedrals and Catholic schools and such) is minimal. If you want to live within the area controlled by the Vatican, you can, but if you don't agree with everything the Vatican says, you don't have to abide by it as long as you don't actually live in Vatican City. You can be guided in the case of things you're undecided on, and you are free to blatantly disagree with some teachings.

The proposed one free Caliphate is so large that a LOT of people would have to relocate if they don't agree with everything that this new religious government wants them to do.

Why not just restrain the Caliphate to Mecca and/or Medina?

Turn Mecca and/or Medina into an Islamic Vati
can. There you go. Problem solved.

For whom though? The Shia or the Sunni?

[Gig em Aggies]

Well, guess that bloodline's going to get eliminated in a hurry.

Anyway, another, more serious issue with one fixed Caliphate is that, even fixed, there is a LOT of landmass in the proposed "one fixed Caliphate". That means a lot of people living within it. Yes, the Vatican guides all Roman Catholics, but the actual landmass taken up by Vatican City (even when you add in the landmass taken up by other buildings owned or rented by the Vatican for cathedrals and Catholic schools and such) is minimal. If you want to live within the area controlled by the Vatican, you can, but if you don't agree with everything the Vatican says, you don't have to abide by it as long as you don't actually live in Vatican City. You can be guided in the case of things you're undecided on, and you are free to blatantly disagree with some teachings.

The proposed one free Caliphate is so large that a LOT of people would have to relocate if they don't agree with everything that this new religious government wants them to do.

Why not just restrain the Caliphate to Mecca and/or Medina?

Turn Mecca and/or Medina into an Islamic Vatican. There you go. Problem solved.

Doesn't work that way, the extremist ideology the runs rampant through Islam like the plague did through Europe won't get fixed anytime soon so attacks like these will still happen in the future sadly though it may seem.

[Sanctissima]

No, he's not.

He uses the whole "Abu Bakr" thing as a publicity stunt, but he's not actually descended from Muhammad.

We don't know that if he's actually descendant from him. We don't exactly know his genealogy tree.

Given how his real name is Ibrahim, the whole "oh by the way, I'm a descendant of Muhammad, please refer to me from now on as Abu-Bakr" thing makes me very much a skeptic.

[Alaizia]

So it was ISIS after all:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2016/mar/22/brussels-airport-explosions-live-updates

I like how all those liberal multiculturalists were saying that "it probably couldn't" and "we are not sure".

In simple words: Muslim terrorists usually do that stuff.

[Ifreann]

So it was ISIS after all:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2016/mar/22/brussels-airport-explosions-live-updates

I like how all those liberal multiculturalists were saying that "it probably couldn't" and "we are not sure".

Yeah, where do we get off wanting evidence before assigning blame for terrorist attacks?

[Preussenstan]

So it was ISIS after all:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2016/mar/22/brussels-airport-explosions-live-updates

I like how all those liberal multiculturalists were saying that "it probably couldn't" and "we are not sure".

In simple words: Muslim terrorists usually do that stuff.

Islam is a religion of peace. ISIS does not represent Islam and does the opposite of what Islam teaches. So terrorists, if they were members of ISIS, are not true Muslims.

[Vassenor]

So it was ISIS after all:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2016/mar/22/brussels-airport-explosions-live-updates

I like how all those liberal multiculturalists were saying that "it probably couldn't" and "we are not sure".

In simple words: Muslim terrorists usually do that stuff.

Remember, Muslims don't have the right to be considered innocent until proven guilty.

[Ganos Lao]

So it was ISIS after all:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2016/mar/22/brussels-airport-explosions-live-updates

I like how all those liberal multiculturalists were saying that "it probably couldn't" and "we are not sure".

In simple words: Muslim terrorists usually do that stuff.

In that article, we read Deborah Orr's words:

How can we pick our way through the intellectual debris that terrorist attacks leave in their wake, just as surely as they leave broken human bodies in their wake, without sounding like a cringing apologist or a bellicose imperialist? Both approaches further inflame an already appalling crisis of humanity, one that is ripping apart our politics, promoting racism, hatred and isolationism, feeding demagogues and warlords, and destroying any humane, liberal, open values that could help us to resist that which we most fear.

It cannot, surely, be beyond the wit of the world to find the common ground we need in order to stand united against the manufacturers and retailers of hate and death and tragedy.

Notice the key lines:

It cannot, surely, be beyond the wit of the world to find the common ground we need in order to stand united against the manufacturers and retailers of hate and death and tragedy.

One day, they'll call the Saudis out.

And on that day, they will buy the Saudi excuses because yes, Deb, it is clearly beyond the wit of the world to do anything about them.

[Ammerinia]

Woah. Just heard about this now. Horrible. My full condolences to the families of those killed as always.

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

So it was ISIS after all:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2016/mar/22/brussels-airport-explosions-live-updates

I like how all those liberal multiculturalists were saying that "it probably couldn't" and "we are not sure".

In simple words: Muslim terrorists usually do that stuff.

Now, now, Christian terrorists are just as evil as any other terrorists.

Also, we need evidence and everyone is innocent until proven guilty.

[Gig em Aggies]

So it was ISIS after all:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2016/mar/22/brussels-airport-explosions-live-updates

I like how all those liberal multiculturalists were saying that "it probably couldn't" and "we are not sure".

In simple words: Muslim terrorists usually do that stuff.

Is it most likely Daesh sure but their are groups like Al-queda, Al shabab, extremist from the area of Russia where the Boston bomber came from it even could be some other extremist group from Syria or Africa.

[Republic of Tacos]

All of this is completely ridiculous. I give my condolences to the families of those lost in the attack. Our motto has been changed in honor of those people, and the flag has been changed to mourn them. Join me in doing so, in honor of these people.

[United Marxist Nations]

So it was ISIS after all:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2016/mar/22/brussels-airport-explosions-live-updates

I like how all those liberal multiculturalists were saying that "it probably couldn't" and "we are not sure".

In simple words: Muslim terrorists usually do that stuff.

Islam is a religion of peace. ISIS does not represent Islam and does the opposite of what Islam teaches. So terrorists, if they were members of ISIS, are not true Muslims.

I'm not really sure you can say an abstract concept is one of peace, really. Early Islamic societies certainly didn't practice outward peacefulness, and the religion itself was founded by a warlord.

EDIT: That is to say, that Islam is a purely social construct, so the people who make it up are collectively what it is, not abstract concepts like peacefulness.

[Uxupox]

So it was ISIS after all:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2016/mar/22/brussels-airport-explosions-live-updates

I like how all those liberal multiculturalists were saying that "it probably couldn't" and "we are not sure".

In simple words: Muslim terrorists usually do that stuff.

Now, now, Christian terrorists are just as evil as any other terrorists.

Also, we need evidence and everyone is innocent until proven guilty.

You don't see Christian people publicly lauding that attack do you?

[Alvecia]

Now, now, Christian terrorists are just as evil as any other terrorists.

Also, we need evidence and everyone is innocent until proven guilty.

You don't see Christian people publicly lauding that attack do you?

Key word there being publicly.

[Vistulange]

And the Far Right shall grow ever stronger.

But really dont vote us in and this is what you get, and with another million of the 'refugees' coming in this year dont expect it to get any better.

You are a racist bigot who has wet dreams of conquering Istanbul and driving out the barbaric ungodly Turks out of "your" land. Why in bloody hell should we, as rational and thinking people, take somebody such as you seriously? Refugees are refugees, or do you not believe that hundreds of thousands in Syria, Afghanistan or various other war-torn countries are being displaced and are fleeing their very homes, as you often complain that your ancestors have done when the Ottoman Empire conquered Istanbul?

The problem is not the refugees, it is the diseased and cancerous thoughts at both sides. The Middle-East has a virulent cancer of radical Islamism and violent Jihad. Europe and the West have a just as virulent cancer of irredentism, racism and ultranationalism. Your thoughts have no basis in rational thought, only emotion, just as the radical Islamists. Both diseases do not ever condemn their entire respective societies, but for the good of world - if you care about that and not just about your oh-so-holy white race - both cancers must be cut out and eradicated from this world. Populist, radical and irrational ideologies has and will bring only tears and destruction to the world. Nothing more, nothing less.

The many rational Western people ought to condemn you and your thoughts of seeing refugees as so inhuman and violent as to put the bloody word in between apostrophes, just as the few rational people in the Middle-East condemn ISIS and its diseased and cancerous ideology and all variants of it at the risk of their lives and freedoms.

[Saiwania]

Huh... How about Europe colonizing other poorer nations and enslaving them?

Done partially in response to being invaded for centuries by north Africans through Spain and by Seljuks from the east. Europe had long come to the conclusion that if they didn't empire build, their overseas rivals would and thus would threaten Europe's security going forward. Another component was gaining economic advantages in trade.

[Uxupox]

You don't see Christian people publicly lauding that attack do you?

Key word there being publicly.

By that assumption, you can regard that right wingers praise Hitler, left wingers praise Stalin and centrists praise both.

[Free Tristania]

Huh... How about Europe colonizing other poorer nations and enslaving them?

Done partially in response to being invaded for centuries by north Africans through Spain and by Seljuks from the east. Europe had long come to the conclusion that if they didn't empire build, their overseas rivals would and thus would threaten Europe's security going forward. Another component was gaining economic advantages in trade.

Not just "partially".

[Ganos Lao]

The Middle-East has a virulent cancer of radical Islamism and violent Jihad. Europe and the West have a just as virulent cancer of irredentism, racism and ultranationalism.

It all boils down to the institutionalized idiocracy in both cases.

[United Marxist Nations]

The Middle-East has a virulent cancer of radical Islamism and violent Jihad. Europe and the West have a just as virulent cancer of irredentism, racism and ultranationalism.

It all boils down to the institutionalized idiocracy in both cases.

Is your flag the silhouette of the monkey from Lion King holding up a baby (Napoleon?) in a bicorne hat?

[Sanctissima]

Huh... How about Europe colonizing other poorer nations and enslaving them?

Done partially in response to being invaded for centuries by north Africans through Spain and by Seljuks from the east. Europe had long come to the conclusion that if they didn't empire build, their overseas rivals would and thus would threaten Europe's security going forward. Another component was gaining economic advantages in trade.

The economic and imperialist side of things had a lot more to do with it than the whole "gotta conquer them before they conquer us" mentality. You could potentially make an argument for that during the many wars against the Ottoman Empire, but even then, by the time European powers actually started to make significant gains against the Ottomans there were other more influential factors at play.