Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk

shafique wrote:When the resident Islamophobes revel in a Muslim commit crimes, FD joins in with his supporting comments. When a non-Muslim's motivation for his terrorism is discussed, then it becomes 'revelling'.

Everytime I ask which comment(s) of mine people have a problem with, it stays quite or the trolling start. I did protest when babies were killed, shafique claims it serves to highlight the occupation. And you are not discussing shafique, you are trolling.

It boils down to the fact that the man is a terrorist, plain and simple. Terrorist acts such as the one committed by this person are not a one way street, nor does any one religion or race own terrorism. Because he committed the act against his own country and his own people, doesn't change the fact it was the act of a terrorist. Take away that he is Christian and white and the country in question is Norway and replace it with a Chinese man who is a Buddist and attacks a government building in China - doesn't change the fact the act in itself would be called an act of terrorism.

Terrorism, as we understood it to be related to Muslim fanatics has taken on a much more broader meaning. I might add not as broad to the extent that Shaf has taken it - every act or potential act of violence translates into terrorism. If you go by his definition that would include the man who kills his family.

For sure there are more like Brievik, as he claims to have cells, who share his views and would go to extremes. And then you those who share his views but don't act on them. He blamed his government for being extremely relaxed on immigration and went to the source of what he thought was the cause of what he viewed as a problem in his country. I read where the camp was a place for youth to go who had an interest in politics and were politically oriented.

I was never aware of the immigration stats in Norway and having taken a look at some articles and stats - yes Shaf stats (you can Google Shaf) - there is a projection that by 2050 Muslims will be the majority of the population in Norway, and the majority would be from Pakistani descent. As it stands today Oslo has the largest number of Muslims. Apparently the numbers are taken from Islamic organizations/mosques and it is believed that the number is larger as many adult Muslims aren't "registered" or are minors. A contributing factor to Brievik's actions???

There probably are Muslim terrorists rejoicing over this, as they did when 9/11 and 7/7 happened, as someone did the job for them.

No doubt, the guy is a Terrorist.

In this case, his religion is Christianity and he's ethnically Norwegian. I agree, his terrorism is as linked to his religion or nationality as any other terrorist's is - same arguments can be applied in all cases. Look at all the hype from our Islamophobic posters around the failed Times Square Bomber, for example, and substitute 'Christian' for their use of 'Islamic' and 'Norwegian' for 'Pakistani born' etc.

As for speculating whether there are some Muslims somewhere rejoicing at the deaths of children at the hands of this terrorist - I find that a ing and disturbing thought. Why go there - surely it is those who share this terrorist's views and agree with his methods that will be rejoicing, not the groups he hates?

If there are terrorists who are rejoicing, I would not buy into the hype that they are more likely to be Muslim than his fellow Christians. Show me the stats if you believe otherwise.

As for the immigrants contributing to the terrorist act, I find that distasteful too. This is all on the Norwegian Terrorist, not on the objects of his hatred.

To date, I've not read of any Muslim condoning the terrorist attacks - but I have read some weasly excuses.

cheers,
Shafique

Well we do have Hamas and Hezbollah blaming the attack on Israel and Zionists.

I agree, his terrorism is as linked to his religion or nationality as any other terrorist's is

Keep dreaming.

Only those living in fantasy land ignore Muslims who cite their scriptures as cause for their actions and claim Islam had nothing to do with their terrorism / extremist views.

If there are terrorists who are rejoicing, I would not buy into the hype that they are more likely to be Muslim than his fellow Christians. Show me the stats if you believe otherwise.

To date, I've not read of any Muslim condoning the terrorist attacks - but I have read some weasly excuses.

Here you go:

Muslims taking credit for the attack:

NRK is reporting that an unknown group called "Helpers of the Global Jihad" have posted a message that this is only the beginning of the reaction to Norwegian periodicals publishing the Muhammed cartoons, according to Andrew Boyle, a journalist in Norway.

Update: This website has some more details, although the group is said to be called Ansar al-Jihad al-Alam.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/blog/20 ... e-coverage

Muslim message boards celebrating the attack:

"Cheers about the attack on Islamic Internet forums"
The news of an explosion in the Norwegian government quarter was cheered as "good news" by Al-Qaida followers on Islamic Internet forums. "You don't have much more time to pull your soldiers out of Afghanistan or you'll see blood in the streets", wrote one user.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/07/islam ... rders.html


It almost seems you intentionally say the dumbest things in the hopes your opponents aren't aware of how easily refutable your comments are.

^Fascinating how the Islamophobes have found a twisted way to blame Muslims in a thread about this Norwegian, Islamophobic Terrorist.

It's almost as if they feel some guilt. Strange that.



But as I said, substitute 'Norwegian' for the posts where the phobes talked about 'Pakistani' and 'Christian' for 'Muslim/Islamic' in all the posts about Muslim terrorist attacks started by them, and you'll see that they are the ones generalising (as eh is doing in the post above).

Hypocrisy is applying one rule for one terrorist attack (in many cases failed attacks) and then taking a different line when it is a right wing Terrorist who shares your political views!

I, on the other hand, have never hesitated to condemn any terrorist - be it Baruch Goldstein or Muhammad Atta. We are still waiting for eh to even acknowledge that Goldstein was a religously motivated terrorist!!

Cheers,
Shafique

You claimed you didn't know of any Muslims who condoned the attacks and I quoted sources showing Muslim message boards were praising the attacks and some groups even claiming responsibility.

Now you're trying to spin it that I'm blaming Muslims for the attack.

Good grief. Out of Lithium?

What I wrote was 100% accurate. Your third hand account (someone said Al Qaida said) is the first I've heard of an instance of a Muslim revelling in the attack. I think that even you won't take this to be proof that this view is widespread - or would you?

As for blaming Muslims - I was referring to your whataboutery arguments.

I mean, this thread is about a Christian Terrorist who shares your Islamophobic and anti-Multi-cultural views, isn't it?

I note that you are still to man up and answer the question posed in the other thread (the one where you said you'd get back to me, and then developed selective amnesia).

So, which political views of this terrorist do you disagree with? Simple question.

Cheers,
Shafique

As for speculating whether there are some Muslims somewhere rejoicing at the deaths of children at the hands of this terrorist - I find that a ing and disturbing thought. Why go there - surely it is those who share this terrorist's views and agree with his methods that will be rejoicing, not the groups he hates?

Where did I say they are rejoicing the death of children? They would be rejoicing the ACT OF TERRORISM, especially in a country that thought a cartoon of Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) was OK, an act of terrorism by one of their own who was a white Christian, against his own government and people.

If there are terrorists who are rejoicing, I would not buy into the hype that they are more likely to be Muslim than his fellow Christians. Show me the stats if you believe otherwise.

See above. You don't have to be a terrorist to be a Muslim. Muslims who were not terrorists rejoiced over 7/7 and 9/11 just because of their hatred towards Western society. So I would say it could be Muslim terrorists and non-terrorists and Brievik's like-minded "associates" rejoicing.

As for the immigrants contributing to the terrorist act, I find that distasteful too. This is all on the Norwegian Terrorist, not on the objects of his hatred.

Again, where did I say immigrants contributed to the terrorist act?? He stated he was angry with his government for being so lenient on immigration, the majority of immigrants which were Muslim. Are you discounting his reasons for what he did and looking at the act of terrorism only??

To date, I've not read of any Muslim condoning the terrorist attacks - but I have read some weasly excuses.

[/quote]

Shaf, because you haven't read it, or did any research to dispute my statement, doesn't mean that they aren't. It's like everything else with you: if you don't read about it or hear about it - it isn't happening.

You are not representative of the Muslim World. You are one person, with one opinion, with one view. Brievik had an opinion, and his opinion and anger towards his government is shared by millions of people throughtout the Western World who are watching their country go through extreme change because of immigration. Difference is, he chose an act of terrorism to express his opinion.

Bora, please re-read what I said.

I was quite clear - to date I haven't read about Muslims revelling in this Terrorist attack. I didn't say that I therefore believed that it hadn't happened somewhere - and eh's post about a reported posting on a website is just one reference.

You may have noticed that I have been reading quite a bit about this Terrorist attack, and in the course of that reading, I haven't come across reports of Muslims celebrating. I stated this fact. (I'm not extrapolating the fact that no Muslim I know is celebrating -but I guess I could do that too.. I stated clearly about the reports I've read.)

I'm sure that those who agree with this guy's actions are celebrating - especially if the two cells exist - those guys are not only celebrating, but planning their attacks too. That is scary enough.

I don't see what is helped by imagining that there are Muslims who share the glee of these 'Christian' Islamophobes?? Even if there were one or two - what point does that make?

In this case, a Christian terrorist has committed an atrocity - and whilst I'm stopping way way short of the generalisations the usual suspects employ when a Muslim attempts an attack, somehow you're choosing to blame me.

I understand the usual suspects wishing to divert attention away from the facts of this case, but I'm a bit confused why you're bringing up imaginary or unrepresentative scenarios. Did you meet many Muslims who celebrated 7/7 - I certainly didn't. I read of a few nutters, sure - but they are to Islam what Brievik and his ilk are to Christianity. Aren't they?

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:Bora, please re-read what I said.

I was quite clear - to date I haven't read about Muslims revelling in this Terrorist attack. I didn't say that I therefore believed that it hadn't happened somewhere - and eh's post about a reported posting on a website is just one reference.

You may have noticed that I have been reading quite a bit about this Terrorist attack, and in the course of that reading, I haven't come across reports of Muslims celebrating. I stated this fact. (I'm not extrapolating the fact that no Muslim I know is celebrating -but I guess I could do that too.. I stated clearly about the reports I've read.)

I'm sure that those who agree with this guy's actions are celebrating - especially if the two cells exist - those guys are not only celebrating, but planning their attacks too. That is scary enough.

I don't see what is helped by imagining that there are Muslims who share the glee of these 'Christian' Islamophobes?? Even if there were one or two - what point does that make?

In this case, a Christian terrorist has committed an atrocity - and whilst I'm stopping way way short of the generalisations the usual suspects employ when a Muslim attempts an attack, somehow you're choosing to blame me.

I understand the usual suspects wishing to divert attention away from the facts of this case, but I'm a bit confused why you're bringing up imaginary or unrepresentative scenarios. Did you meet many Muslims who celebrated 7/7 - I certainly didn't. I read of a few nutters, sure - but they are to Islam what Brievik and his ilk are to Christianity. Aren't they?

Cheers,
Shafique

Twist, duck, shuffle.

Shaf, please re-read your post!!! and re-read my post!!!

For someone so "well read" and assuming that no one else is capable of reading about the current events, you are doing two things: making yourself look very foolish or insulting people, or is it both??

One can celebrate verbally Shaf. Speak of something in a good way and a bad way. It was written and shown how Muslims rejoiced over 7/7 and 9/11 - by Muslims!!!! So, if I didn't actually meet someone it means it didn't happen? OOOOOOOOOOOkay. Actually I have sat with Muslims who were vocal about the "success" of 9/11.

I'm sure you had your head into all the news on 7/7 and 9/11 and to say "a few nutters" celebrated is sooooooooooooo ignorant seeing as much there is out there proving that it was more than a "few". I won't waste time pulling all the reports/videos that show those "celebrating" as that would be feeding into your game. Why do you make such an effort to come off so well informed, yet prove yourself to be otherwise??

I asked a simple question - did you meet any Muslims who celebrated 7/7, because I didn't. (I was nearly caught up in it, btw).

I repeat:

I read of a few nutters, sure - but they are to Islam what Brievik and his ilk are to Christianity. Aren't they?


Is the situation any different this time round? Aren't there a few right-wing nutters who are celebrating this attack?

Cheers,
Shafique

I asked a simple question - did you meet any Muslims who celebrated 7/7, because I didn't. (I was nearly caught up in it, btw).

Caught up in what? Celebrating?

Re-read my post.

I repeat:

I read of a few nutters, sure - but they are to Islam what Brievik and his ilk are to Christianity. Aren't they?

Re-read my post.

Is the situation any different this time round? Aren't there a few right-wing nutters who are celebrating this attack?

I don't know, I didn't meet any white Christian right wing nutter who is celebrating? Did you??

-- Tue Jul 26, 2011 2:37 pm --

What I find so funny is that no one is denying this guy is a white Christian Norwegian. And everyone understands what his motivation was - beliefs, not based on religion, but government and immigration, in particular Muslims - were behind his actions, which no one on this thread is justifying or agreeing with, and Shaf, you manage to make this about Muslims.

Why the evasiveness.

I'm clearly stating that the few Muslims that celebrated 7/7 were nutters - I certainly did not meet any in the UK. I was on the tube network when the bombs exploded. It was not a nice experience. It was the second time I was caught up in terrorist bombs - the first time I was working in Docklands when the IRA bombed an area I walked past each day.

You seem to be more than willing to speculate about Muslims celebrating, but remarkably coy about speculating about those who share this terrorist's political views celebrating his actions. That speaks volumes.

How about we stay with facts?

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:Why the evasiveness.

I'm clearly stating that the few Muslims that celebrated 7/7 were nutters - I certainly did not meet any in the UK. I was on the tube network when the bombs exploded. It was not a nice experience. It was the second time I was caught up in terrorist bombs - the first time I was working in Docklands when the IRA bombed an area I walked past each day.

You seem to be more than willing to speculate about Muslims celebrating, but remarkably coy about speculating about those who share this terrorist's political views celebrating his actions. That speaks volumes.

How about we stay with facts?

Cheers,
Shafique

Evasive? This coming from the King of Evasion.

Do you think celebrating was isolated to the UK and the US?? Islamic terrorists commit acts of terrorism based on religion: (Allah Akbar?? - in the name of God, ring a bell?) against so-called infidels. Brievik acted on his political views. Political views don't necessarily translate into religious views. Religion has nothing to do with being Islamophobic. Clearly you don't see the difference. Errrr, FACT!!!

How did it feel when you could have been killed by Muslim terrorists in the name of God??, other than you would have been sacrificed and went to Paradise for the cause, even tho you had no part in it?

Why the hostility?

Are you going to be hostile to any right-wing conservative Norwegian who was around the area of the bombings in Oslo?

I'm just making the point that in my knowledge and research, the vast, vast, vast, vast, vast majority of Muslims were not celebrating the 7/7 bombings. If you believe you know better, we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Now, back to this terror attack that was NOT carried out by a Muslim.

Cheers,
Shafique

Extremist!!!! A few nutters to vast, vast, vast, vast majority.

You see Shaf, this is why I always end up kicking myself in the arse for trying to have a discussion with you. It always proves to be a waste of time. I get no satisfaction going back and forth with you. It's like running on a treadmill - getting no where fast. So anyone who doesn't see it your way or agree with you is hostile?? Grow up Shaf and get back to me when you are ready to have a debate where you can contribute something. Screw your knowledge, stats, facts, predictions. When it comes to discussions that don't hold up you flimsy arugments.

It seems that it doesn't matter how many people can prove you wrong, you still don't get it.

I'll take my leave now as there is no discussion or debate when you have to twist and evade to justify or cover your own errors that lack of whatever to support claims you make in your posts.

I'm still scratching my head over where you are getting your stats from about the proportion of Muslims supporting 7/7 compared to the proportion of non-Muslim right-wingers supporting this terrorist act.

Few nutters supporting is indeed equivalent to the vast, vast, vast majority NOT supporting.

You didn't answer - why the hostility and focus on Muslims etc.??

This thread is about a Christian right-wing terrorist nutter, isn't it? Or do you believe the loon argument that Moooslims are indeed inherently violent etc??

Cheers,
Shafique

Your very first post that started this thread:

[shafique"]This commentator summed up the situation quite nicely:

"What needs to be done in the West is acknowledge that domestic far-right extremism is as dangerous to society as Islamic extremism."

Note YOUR inclusion of Islam. I'm confused. You brought it into the thread, but no one should discuss it?

I'm still scratching my head over where you are getting your stats from about the proportion of Muslims supporting 7/7 compared to the proportion of non-Muslim right-wingers supporting this terrorist act.

Few nutters supporting is indeed equivalent to the vast, vast, vast majority NOT supporting.

Your denial of reality is amazing. Shaf, one doesn't need "stats" when they possess common sense. But you should come up with "stats" for your extreme statements as there is no common sense applied.

You didn't answer - why the hostility and focus on Muslims etc.??

I have no hostility to Muslims. If there is any hostility it's towards your narrow, one-sided, limited, far-fetched, state-of-denial statements. You confuse hostility with reality. Is one hostile when they don't agree with you?

This thread is about a Christian right-wing terrorist nutter, isn't it? Or do you believe the loon argument that Moooslims are indeed inherently violent etc??

You state that the thread is about Christian right-wing terrorist nutter but go on to ask a question about Muslims (note the correct spelling Shaf). A bit of a contradiction hey? Which is it Shaf? A thread about a Christian right-wing nutter or Muslims??

Attacks on military bases, naval ships, embassies (all of which were US) have been proven to be by Muslim terrorists. One clue to knowing that is: the terrorist organizations generally announce their responsibility!!! Oh, I know, you will downplay it and tell me that I probably made that up and you are going to ask: where is the proof??

I agree with the quote:

"What needs to be done in the West is acknowledge that domestic far-right extremism is as dangerous to society as Islamic extremism."

I'm struggling to see what you are basing your disagreement with me on?

Is it this quote:

Their school of analysis, which puts the blame on all Muslims for acts of terrorism perpetrated by Islamic extremists, has been fully discredited — by their own reaction to the Oslo attacks. While it’s obvious that few if any of them will take this lesson to heart, the rest of us should — terrorist acts are committed by individuals, and it is those individuals who should be held responsible.

Or is it this question I posed you:

If there are terrorists who are rejoicing, I would not buy into the hype that they are more likely to be Muslim than his fellow Christians. Show me the stats if you believe otherwise.

But ultimately, I'm still not sure I understand your reply to this:

I understand the usual suspects wishing to divert attention away from the facts of this case, but I'm a bit confused why you're bringing up imaginary or unrepresentative scenarios. Did you meet many Muslims who celebrated 7/7 - I certainly didn't. I read of a few nutters, sure - but they are to Islam what Brievik and his ilk are to Christianity. Aren't they?

The last point is quite easy to understand - the few nutters who celebrated 7/7 are to Islam what Brievik and his kind are to Christianity.

Are you disagreeing with this statement and believe that Muslims are more bloodthirsty than right-wing nutters as a group? I would have thought the billion or so Muslims not nutters would drown out statistically the few examples of those celebrating 7/7 you could dig up.

Cheers,
Shafique

Errr, this thread, according to you, is not about Muslims.

Go back to my previous post as I made some edits that you can chew on.

And the billons (note the S) of Christians in the world are not representative of Brievik, the same way the billon or so Muslims do not represent Islamic terrorists.

The word terrorism has always been related to Islam/Muslims. Where do you think that came from? Muslims gave birth to that word. The word terrorism has evolved to being an act of terror - without a face and not necessarily connected to religion - it can be government and race. Society will eventually move away from the Muslim connection as more terrorists pop up conducting acts of terror for reasons other than religion - such as Brievik.

Well, had a look at your edits. I agree that there are terrorist attacks carried out by Muslims - when did I deny that?

This particular terrorist attack was carried out by someone the police called a 'Christian Fundamentalist'.

So, the choice is whether we make the same generalisations that are made to tarnish Muslims by association when an attack is made by a Muslim to tarnish all Christians. I think we'd all agree that this is ridiculous.

Especially given the fact that the vast majority of Terrorist attacks in Europe and USA are not carried out by Muslims. (Based on actual facts of actual attacks as recorded by Europol and the FBI). This one act adds to the list of heinous terrorist acts carried out by non-Muslims.

This thread is about this latest Terrorist attack.

When you have worked out what you are disagreeing with me on, let me know (just make a distinct list, stating what you don't agree with).

Cheers,
Shafique

This particular terrorist attack was carried out by someone the police called a 'Christian Fundamentalist'.

It was NOT done in the name religion!! You either can't grasp that or refuse to.

Especially given the fact that the vast majority of Terrorist attacks in Europe and USA are not carried out by Muslims. (Based on actual facts of actual attacks as recorded by Europol and the FBI). This one act adds to the list of heinous terrorist acts carried out by non-Muslims.

WHAT???? I'm talking internationally Shaf. You fail to include terrorist attacks in the Middle East and Africa. When was the last time you heard of a non-Muslim organization performing an act of terrorism in Pakistan, Yeman, Lebanon, Malaysia, India, etc.?? Yes, add this terrorist act to the very long list of other terrorist attacks carried out by non-Muslims worldwide. Wow, you give a whole new meaning to the word denial!!!

This thread is about this latest Terrorist attack.

That's not what you said earlier Shaf. If you think you are going to get past me trying to confuse me, you have a long way to go.

When you have worked out what you are disagreeing with me on, let me know (just make a distinct list, stating what you don't agree with).

Back at you Shaf.

Make a distinct list? That would be just an exercise Shaf, because it would require me repeating everything I've so far posted.

Ok, let's agree that we both think each other is confused.

I'm quite sure I typed in this statement above:

shafique wrote:But the facts are that I stated that I do NOT blame Christianity or the violent verses of the Bible for this nutter's crimes.

As for this terrorist attack by the terrorist labelled a 'Christian Fundamentalist' (which took place in Europe) - anything new you want to discuss?

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:Ok, let's agree that we both think each other is confused.

As for this terrorist attack by the terrorist labelled a 'Christian Fundamentalist' - anything new you want to discuss?

Cheers,
Shafique

You using the excuse of being confused is weak. The only confusion I expressed is the confusion you were employing to change the purpose of what this thread was about to avoid actually answering anything.

I really don't want to go another round with you as all I would get from you would be the same sh*t, just a different "discussion".

Cheers

I think you guys are missing an important fact. That when muslim terrorist attacks takes place, they are done in the name of Islam (mostly) and (mostly) against non-muslims.

This guy has never said he carried out the attacks in the name of Christianity, but a a protest against his free Government and what they are allowing in Norway and indeed across Europe. I think in this case, you need to put Christianity aside as it has very little to do with it. Plus that fact he carried out the attacks against his own people, because they were supporters of his Governments ideals.

What he has done is shocking beyond belief, but a part of me is really not surprised that something like this didn't happen sooner. As I have said before, there has been a feeling of discontent across Europe for a very long time it's just until now, no one took action. I don't seriously think this will be the last case of it's kind either.

Chocoholic wrote:I think you guys are missing an important fact. That when muslim terrorist attacks takes place, they are done in the name of Islam (mostly) and (mostly) against non-muslims.

This guy has never said he carried out the attacks in the name of Christianity, but a a protest against his free Government and what they are allowing in Norway and indeed across Europe. I think in this case, you need to put Christianity aside as it has very little to do with it. Plus that fact he carried out the attacks against his own people, because they were supporters of his Governments ideals.

What he has done is shocking beyond belief, but a part of me is really not surprised that something like this didn't happen sooner. As I have said before, there has been a feeling of discontent across Europe for a very long time it's just until now, no one took action. I don't seriously think this will be the last case of it's kind either.

Chocs, if you read through my posts, you will find that was a point that I was making to Shaf. I don't think the guy yelled "In the name of Jesus Christ" at any time, nor has he made any statemets is was religiously based.

You're right BB. He;s even stated he is NOT a religious man, but he has called himself a modern day Crusader, but that's the only real link thus far.

Good points both chocs and bora, and i'm inclined to agree... if the attacks weren't so extreme. Yes, what this guy did was beyond belief and hard to comprehend.
Personal beliefs and ideals alone, do not explain what he did.
Religion is the obvious catalyst to take him to the next level of brainwashing, and it would make sense that he is a religious fundamentalist.
He might not have said it but only religion can screw people's minds up to that extent.

benwj wrote:Good points both chocs and bora, and i'm inclined to agree... if the attacks weren't so extreme. Yes, what this guy did was beyond belief and hard to comprehend.
Personal beliefs and ideals alone, do not explain what he did.
Religion is the obvious catalyst to take him to the next level of brainwashing, and it would make sense that he is a religious fundamentalist.
He might not have said it but only religion can screw people's minds up to that extent.

He did say it. He said he bases his views on logic and reason and not religion and that he was moderately religious.