Terror attacks by Islamist groups

[Skids]

2015.11.28 Cameroon Dabanga 5 dead 12 wounded
Two female suicide bombers detonate in a small two, sending five innocents to their deaths.

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/11/29/afric ... index.html

2015.11.29 Nigeria Bam 7 dead
Boko Haram roll into a village, kill seven adults and kidnap unknown number of teenage girls to rape.

at least seven persons were left dead in Bam village of Borno state when armed Boko Haram terrorists attacked in the early hours of Sunday and abducted unspecified, but large number of teenage girls, witnesses said.

http://leadership.ng/news/479102/boko-h ... irls-borno

[Skids]

^Confirmation from reputable sources, please.

It is unacceptable to list violent deaths that cannot be verified, otherwise you could quite easily be contributing to a propaganda exercise. You do understand all kinds of nutters, including ISIS, plant and promote these things to further their military ends, right? They might be laying claim to something to frighten people into submission, or simply planting nonsense to provoke attack and further death. So you have an ethical responsibility to research the facts, and provide evidence accordingly. And, to be clear, repeating someone else's error or unverifiable claim third-hand is NOT evidence.

Who killed who? In what context? Who is verifying the deaths and their provenance? ISIS? A journalist paid by ISIS? Al Qaeda? Hezbollah? Al Nusra Front? The Iranians? The Assad regime? Iran? The CIA?

Supporting god knows what objectives through unresearched, copy-and-paste efforts is sheer negligence.

You'll notice ALL my reports have verified links now attached, just for you PTID

[Jezza]

Couldn't work out the most appropriate thread so just picked this one!


Saudi authorities appear set in the next few days to carry out a series of beheadings across the country of more than 50 men convicted of terrorism offences. Among those facing execution are three young men who were juveniles when they were arrested.

The publication earlier this week of an article in the newspaper Okaz, which has close links to the Saudi Ministry of the Interior, has convinced families of the accused and concerned human-rights organisations that the executions are imminent.

Sources have said that the plan is to behead the men in several cities across the kingdom, most likely after Friday prayers

http://www.msn.com/en-au/news/world/sau ... CID=HPCDHP


Why do they seem to do bad things after Friday prayers?? Is it that they prayed for strength to do bad things?

Genuine question - anyone know?

And how the hell do they have a seat on the UN Humans Rights thingy

This cartoon best sums up the situation with Saudi Arabia.

[Morrigu]

[watt price tully]

Ultra-Orthodox Jewish Jitsu

? drug affected man was trying to steal scooter & bikes in Ripponlea outside a small synagogue in Ripponlea last Friday. The others ran off leaving this bloke. Nice take down, police arrived & arrested the yobbo praising the woe of the good rabbi & others in this ultra orthodox sect. The others & the Rabbi were also saying "use nice words & calm, be calm" to the ? drunk ? drug affected nutter

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PWVdXu217aE

[Skids]

2015.11.29 DRC Eringeti 7 dead
Seven civilians at a hospital are hacked to death by Islamic extremists.
A local non-governmental organisation however put the toll much higher, at 30 dead

http://www.africareview.com/News/At-lea ... index.html

2015.11.30 Iraq Baghdad 9 dead 21 wounded
Nine Shiite pilgrims are sent straight to Allah by a Sunni suicide bomber.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wir ... s-35487898

[Skids]

[David]

Here's the original poll those claims are based on:

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jso ... apoll.html

(No idea about the credibility or methodology of the poll itself, mind you - it's run by an American organisation called 'Terror Free Tomorrow' which is associated with figures like Bill Clinton and John McCain.)

The only particularly eyebrow-raising result in that poll is the 75% affirmative for the question "Do you support financial assistance for Iraqi fighters, the Palestinian groups Hamas and Islamic Jihad, and Hizbullah?". This may sound alarming if you automatically translate this as "75% of Syrians support terrorism" (the soundbite Skids and his mates in the Barbarossa-sphere are licking their lips over), but the facts are not nearly so simple. The organisations listed play dual roles - both as fundamentalist aggressors and also as a perceived resistance force.

If you asked Australians in a nationwide poll tomorrow if they support terrorism, 99% would probably say no. Yet if we were being attacked by a foreign power, how many do you think would oppose, say, bombing military checkpoints if it were to prove strategically beneficial? Hell, if our flag-waving anti-Islamic patriots lived up to their personas, they'd be strapping bombs on themselves.

In 2007, Palestine and Iraq were actively at war and Lebanon, if I recall correctly, had just endured a massive bombing campaign and partial invasion from Israel. These groups were on the frontline of those respective conflicts. That's not a defence of any of these groups. All of them have targeted civilians, not just soldiers. But when they're your only functional resistance, or your close ally's only functional resistance, you're inclined to be at least somewhat favourably inclined towards them.

We wouldn't ever support such monsters, though, would we? Lol. Yeah right. Have a read through some recent threads on here to see how pious we feel about civilian casualties in a 'necessary' war. That doesn't mean that I actually think any of the posters here airily waving away victims of drone strikes would willingly pull out a kalashnikov and start murdering civilians themselves. Most people aren't like that. Likewise, I wonder how many people campaigning for refugee families to be barred from entering the country would be willing to stand at the threshold of a squalid, disease-ridden refugee camp and drag them back in. I guess there's a big difference between abstract support of bad things being done by other people and actually doing it yourself, isn't there?

[Skids]

[David]

^ I think you'll find that the 'anyone but Assad' popularity vote is pretty high in parts of Syria nowadays. And we're talking about Raqqa, for god's sake. I'm surprised there's anyone still living there who isn't at least somewhat onside with ISIS.

As for me being an apologist, I'll repeat what I said before: an apologist for what? Muslims?

[watt price tully]

Here's the original poll those claims are based on:

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jso ... apoll.html

(No idea about the credibility or methodology of the poll itself, mind you - it's run by an American organisation called 'Terror Free Tomorrow' which is associated with figures like Bill Clinton and John McCain.)

The only particularly eyebrow-raising result in that poll is the 75% affirmative for the question "Do you support financial assistance for Iraqi fighters, the Palestinian groups Hamas and Islamic Jihad, and Hizbullah?". This may sound alarming if you automatically translate this as "75% of Syrians support terrorism" (the soundbite Skids and his mates in the Barbarossa-sphere are licking their lips over), but the facts are not nearly so simple. The organisations listed play dual roles - both as fundamentalist aggressors and also as a perceived resistance force.

If you asked Australians in a nationwide poll tomorrow if they support terrorism, 99% would probably say no. Yet if we were being attacked by a foreign power, how many do you think would oppose, say, bombing military checkpoints if it were to prove strategically beneficial? Hell, if our flag-waving anti-Islamic patriots lived up to their personas, they'd be strapping bombs on themselves.

In 2007, Palestine and Iraq were actively at war and Lebanon, if I recall correctly, had just endured a massive bombing campaign and partial invasion from Israel. These groups were on the frontline of those respective conflicts. That's not a defence of any of these groups. All of them have targeted civilians, not just soldiers. But when they're your only functional resistance, or your close ally's only functional resistance, you're inclined to be at least somewhat favourably inclined towards them.

We wouldn't ever support such monsters, though, would we? Lol. Yeah right. Have a read through some recent threads on here to see how pious we feel about civilian casualties in a 'necessary' war. That doesn't mean that I actually think any of the posters here airily waving away victims of drone strikes would willingly pull out a kalashnikov and start murdering civilians themselves. Most people aren't like that. Likewise, I wonder how many people campaigning for refugee families to be barred from entering the country would be willing to stand at the threshold of a squalid, disease-ridden refugee camp and drag them back in. I guess there's a big difference between abstract support of bad things being done by other people and actually doing it yourself, isn't there?

What you've said it utterly reasonable. However, at one time one does end uo making judgments.

Skids's machine gun approach is just that - not thinking but re-hashing without looking for explanation & without verifying the credibility of photocopied statistics.

Having said that, you've got to remember that many of these societies are now devoid of educated middle classes so information is more narrowly provided relying on Arab state press & religious leaders for education. Accordingly, the west will certainly not have good press. There is a distinct lack of pluralistic forms of information provision.

[Skids]

Skids's machine gun approach is just that - not thinking but re-hashing without looking for explanation & without verifying the credibility of photocopied statistics.

Well, it IS my thread WPT (read the title)
And if you don't like the facts (that I ALWAYS provide links for,how do YOU determine their CREDIBILITY dear sir?) that I post about "Bad Things DONE by muslims" .... then don't f.c.kn read them.

[Skids]

[watt price tully]

Skids's machine gun approach is just that - not thinking but re-hashing without looking for explanation & without verifying the credibility of photocopied statistics.

Well, it IS my thread WPT (read the title)
And if you don't like the facts (that I ALWAYS provide links for,how do YOU determine their CREDIBILITY dear sir?) that I post about "Bad Things DONE by muslims" .... then don't f.c.kn read them.

With due respect my dear boy, we all have opinions. Yours & right ones

Nevertheless, I've expressed my opinion & you've expressed yours. Cutting & pasting links is just that: links. Think it through, links to what though? Therein lies the crux of the matter.

David's explanation is quite reasonable but insufficient to explain why people polled the way they did.

[HAL]

Tell me more about your thread WPT read the title 8 And if you don't like the facts that he or she provide links forhow do YOU determine their CREDIBILITY dear sir.