Terror Attack at Canadian Mosque

[Babylon]

1 hour ago, StanSP said:

Classic Daily Mail. 'Lone wolf' ffs  

I get the Mail hatred, but they have used that before in the case of ISIS. And the Lone wolf quote comes from a Canadian official, of which they are just reporting his words. I'd have thought a writer would have understood the punctuation, but obviously not considering her use of full stops.

 

It's possible to be a lone wolf and still a terrorist, as the officials in Canada have pretty much said.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4072998/We-make-New-Year-mayhem-ISIS-supporters-call-lone-wolf-attacks-cinemas-malls-HOSPITALS-release-pictures-knife-wielding-fanatic-chasing-Santa-Claus.html

 

[Babylon]

2 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

This is my last comment on this topic as I find the debate about such events too depressing - particularly the muted reaction of people who express (justified) outrage at similar atrocities committed by Islamists.....and who sometimes use them to stoke Islamophobia. In fact, I find this so depressing that I'm going to take an extended break from FoxesTalk - or FascistTalk, as it sometimes seems to be.

 

Your comments about the press are a red herring. The debate was about the comparative response of people on here.

 

I repeat my assertion that some people are massively more outraged by Islamist extremists killing innocent civilians than about white extremists doing likewise. In fact, some people use Islamist terror attacks to stir up Islamophobic hatred, while downplaying similar atrocities committed by white supremacists (deranged or otherwise).

 

Exhibit A: your posts in this thread, which mainly seek to find excuses for the comparative lack of outrage from "the usual right-wing suspects", to quibble over details, to create diversions about the press & to explain why we're not really bothered about Canada despite its cultural similarity.

 

Compare and contrast with....

 

Exhibit B: Your posts in the thread about the deranged Islamist terrorist who launched an attack in Sydney (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Sydney_hostage_crisis)

-  Bloody lunatic, why doesn't he **** off to Iraq and Syria and fight for IS rather than holding a load of innocents hostage.

- A radical preacher already known to police. What a surprise. Why the hell is he even in Australia?

-  **** getting him alive, send him to his maker.

- looking around the rest of the world, they shouldn't make the mistakes Europe has. I was surprised just how Islamic Sydney was, in Parramatta it was like little Lebanon.

-  Spare a thought for the people of Pakistan as well. The taliban are holding up a school and twenty dead already.

-  The disturbing thing about this Sydney incident is the number of people making excuses for him, some even despite calling he mentally incapable then blaming western policy in the middle east etc. There is no appeasement to evil, didn't we learn this in the 1930s?

-  15 children blown to pieces by Al Queda in Yemen with car bombs.

-  Good luck with getting the Islamic community to root out these people, they won't even grass up their own peadophiles the majority of the time when they know them.

-  We are now in situations where we allow our own innocent citizens to be killed in galling circumtances so we can protect the rights of people who dedicate their lives to inciting people to kill the innocent on the basis of religion and sometimes even in the end carrying out the acts themselves.

 

 

 

Like it or not, if people can relate to something then it's more likely they will feel the fear of it more and feel compelled to comment. A white guy shooting up a mosque, doesn't present fear to most white people. It doesn't feel a threat to us or our way of life... where as a Christmas market attack does. You understand the human tragedy in of it, but the incident itself doesn't pose a threat to me or my loved ones. So I think that can have a bearing on it.

 

 

[Barky]

I think everyone picks and chooses what they're affected by to some extent. It's probably only natural that the killings of white western people will draw a more emotive response from other white western people because it's much easier to picture yourself as a victim. 

 

Look at the war on drugs in the Philippines, it's easily one of the most outrageous things to happen this decade with about 1,000 people being almost indiscriminately killed every week and vigilante murder practically legalised. More people killed there in months than in years of western terrorism but it barely rates a mention on here let alone a multi-page thread. Why, because people on here can't relate to it. Very few will have been to the Philippines or know any filipino people so it's difficult to feel any genuine emotion about it.

 

[Webbo]

I stand to be corrected here, but I reckon I hardly ever comment on things like this, I certainly don't act outraged. It goes without saying that we're all appalled by murder. I don't know what I can add to the debate by saying how disgusted I am.

 

Maybe I argue with people about motives or their reactions but outrage? doesn't sound like me.

[Jattdogg]

2 hours ago, Babylon said:

I get the Mail hatred, but they have used that before in the case of ISIS. And the Lone wolf quote comes from a Canadian official, of which they are just reporting his words. I'd have thought a writer would have understood the punctuation, but obviously not considering her use of full stops.

 

It's possible to be a lone wolf and still a terrorist, as the officials in Canada have pretty much said.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4072998/We-make-New-Year-mayhem-ISIS-supporters-call-lone-wolf-attacks-cinemas-malls-HOSPITALS-release-pictures-knife-wielding-fanatic-chasing-Santa-Claus.html

 

Im glad that Trudeau called it as it is as opposed to other officials...

 

"This was a group of innocents targeted for practicing their faith. Make no mistake – this was a terrorist attack."

 

 

[Babylon]

4 minutes ago, Jattdogg said:

Im glad that Trudeau called it as it is as opposed to other officials...

 

"This was a group of innocents targeted for practicing their faith. Make no mistake – this was a terrorist attack."

 

 

Has anyone said it wasn't, the two things aren't mutually exclusive. It can still be a lone wolf and a terror attack.

[Jattdogg]

Just now, Babylon said:

Has anyone said it wasn't, the two things aren't mutually exclusive. It can still be a lone wolf and a terror attack.

Im not debating that. Just glad that our leader calls it for what it was for once.

[Carl the Llama]

3 hours ago, MattP said:

Stop throwing your toys out of the pram, it wasn't a "red herring" at all, it was a completely fair point as to the question you asked why we spend more time speaking about European news events than ones Worldwide despite te cultural feeling towards the old commonwealth nations, to which Bovril also made a good point on

"FacistTalk" - ffs. Nothing anyone has said on these forums is anything like facism, you sound as bad as the Lady Gaga's and Madonna's of the World standing on platforms or those on Twitter begging for retweets.

 

As for all your comments you have dragged up from mein 2014, just to be clear, I stand by every single thing I said in it. As I do as well about my feeling we should putting the white guy who shot up that mosque to death, send him to his maker.

And yet...:

8 hours ago, MattP said:

Daily Mail first out of the blocks to claim he "liked Trump". With literally zero evidence then in the article. 

 

Whatever he is he's a bastard, I still wouldn't vote for the death penalty but the older I get I start to wonder what the hell is the point of keeping these mass murdering ideology based terrorists alive.

So in one instance you're frothing at the mouth calling for them to be immediately killed in retaliation and arguing that accepting Muslims into Western societies is a mistake whereas in the other instance your instinctive reaction is to merely stretch as far as considering the merits of killing him.  Come on Matt, you have to hold your hands up to that one you've been caught red handed.

 

And I think the FascistTalk comment is a hyperbolic jab at the way political threads on here tend to get coloured by the same old right-leaning posters who seem to treat political opinions like football teams making dismissive and disparaging remarks about the violent/delicate/psychotic/cry-baby/snowflake/bremoaner lefties, diverting debate by brandishing legitimate concerns as ignorant fear or hate mongering (ie. back in the pre-referendum thread when a certain poster bafflingly insisted I was calling him and all right-wingers racist for relaying my observances about the prevalence of racist opinions amongst Brexiters I'd personally talked to) or by complaining about prejudiced remarks or behaviours committed by these bullying/smug/elitist/condescending lefties that you look back through the thread for only to see that nobody's actually exhibited them.  It's manageable most of the time, I mean we all still continue to post anyway but it doesn't half get frustrating.  

 

Now I wouldn't know personally but I'd imagine that state of affairs is even more frustrating for someone who tries to keep debate humming along with consistently well-researched, carefully thought out posts which highlight their position within the debate and lay out in an understandable manner why they came to this opinion.

 

And for clarification I'm not saying that there aren't any left-leaning posters responsible for committing the same kinds of debate-stalling sins described above (there must be, we hear about them all the time  ) just that aren't as many of them on this particular internet forum.

[Webbo]

Calling people fascists and throwing your toys out the pram because, I'm not sure what exactly, is snowflakish type behaviour. 

 

If people don't like what anyone is saying they're at liberty to disagree, there are plenty of people who do with me. I don't moan about it, I just argue back.

[Strokes]

#facistshavefeelingstoo

[Mike Oxlong]

41 minutes ago, Webbo said:

If people don't like what anyone is saying they're at liberty to disagree, there are plenty of people who do with me. I don't moan about it, I just argue back.

No you don't

[Alf Bentley]

Before I take a Foxes Talk sabbatical (drama queen, I know!), one final post of clarification in response to replies:

 

@Strokes @Webbo 

I don't see anything wrong with people not commenting on terrorist attacks or not expressing outrage. Terrorist attacks are obviously bad news whoever commits them, so expressing outrage seems a bit superfluous to me, too.

So, if I comment on such attacks, it's usually to discuss reasons why they might have happened or things that could be done to stop them happening again.

 

My point was about the contrast: certain people apparently not being bothered about heinous attacks by white extremists, but expressing great outrage at similarly heinous attacks by Islamists.

 

@bovril and @Babylon make a fair point that people are going to identify more with attacks in places and situations familiar to them (Paris, Christmas market etc.)

 

But for me, some people go way beyond that. They turn vitriolic about Islamist attacks and use them as a pretext for launching wide-ranging attacks on Muslims in general....but downplay similar white extremist attacks.

When I looked at that thread about the Sydney attack, that's what I saw from @MattP - as quoted and as compared to his comments in this thread. The contrast is pretty extreme, frankly. Half-hearted quibbling and downplaying for this Quebec attack, but pure vitriol about the Islamist attack in Sydney. Now, Matt may know Sydney much better than Quebec....but he also links the attack to Islamist violence in Yemen and in Pakistan, to the alleged failure of the wider Muslim community to address terrorism, its acquiescence in paedophilia etc. I didn't "throw my toys out of the pram", Matt. I saw that as the promotion of Islamophobic hatred and found it genuinely repulsive (seriously, read and compare the 2 sets of comments).

 

Anyway, drama queen or not, I'm going to take an extended break from this place.

 

Real life seems to be pouring an endless pile of shit on my head recently, so that brings my mood down enough. Spending too much time on here doesn't help (my fault, clearly).

In different circumstances, I might have the patience to argue with views, like Matt's in this instance, that I find offensive - or the calm to ignore them without it affecting my mood.

I seem to be incapable of that so I'll flounce off for a "vacation".

Take care, all.  

[Webbo]

1 minute ago, Alf Bentley said:

Before I take a Foxes Talk sabbatical (drama queen, I know!), one final post of clarification in response to replies:

 

@Strokes @Webbo 

I don't see anything wrong with people not commenting on terrorist attacks or not expressing outrage. Terrorist attacks are obviously bad news whoever commits them, so expressing outrage seems a bit superfluous to me, too.

So, if I comment on such attacks, it's usually to discuss reasons why they might have happened or things that could be done to stop them happening again.

 

My point was about the contrast: certain people apparently not being bothered about heinous attacks by white extremists, but expressing great outrage at similarly heinous attacks by Islamists.

 

@bovril and @Babylon make a fair point that people are going to identify more with attacks in places and situations familiar to them (Paris, Christmas market etc.)

 

But for me, some people go way beyond that. They turn vitriolic about Islamist attacks and use them as a pretext for launching wide-ranging attacks on Muslims in general....but downplay similar white extremist attacks.

When I looked at that thread about the Sydney attack, that's what I saw from @MattP - as quoted and as compared to his comments in this thread. The contrast is pretty extreme, frankly. Half-hearted quibbling and downplaying for this Quebec attack, but pure vitriol about the Islamist attack in Sydney. Now, Matt may know Sydney much better than Quebec....but he also links the attack to Islamist violence in Yemen and in Pakistan, to the alleged failure of the wider Muslim community to address terrorism, its acquiescence in paedophilia etc. I didn't "throw my toys out of the pram", Matt. I saw that as the promotion of Islamophobic hatred and found it genuinely repulsive (seriously, read and compare the 2 sets of comments).

 

Anyway, drama queen or not, I'm going to take an extended break from this place.

 

Real life seems to be pouring an endless pile of shit on my head recently, so that brings my mood down enough. Spending too much time on here doesn't help (my fault, clearly).

In different circumstances, I might have the patience to argue with views, like Matt's in this instance, that I find offensive - or the calm to ignore them without it affecting my mood.

I seem to be incapable of that so I'll flounce off for a "vacation".

Take care, all.  

Make sure you come back Alf.

[Strokes]

2 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

Before I take a Foxes Talk sabbatical (drama queen, I know!), one final post of clarification in response to replies:

 

@Strokes @Webbo 

I don't see anything wrong with people not commenting on terrorist attacks or not expressing outrage. Terrorist attacks are obviously bad news whoever commits them, so expressing outrage seems a bit superfluous to me, too.

So, if I comment on such attacks, it's usually to discuss reasons why they might have happened or things that could be done to stop them happening again.

 

My point was about the contrast: certain people apparently not being bothered about heinous attacks by white extremists, but expressing great outrage at similarly heinous attacks by Islamists.

 

@bovril and @Babylon make a fair point that people are going to identify more with attacks in places and situations familiar to them (Paris, Christmas market etc.)

 

But for me, some people go way beyond that. They turn vitriolic about Islamist attacks and use them as a pretext for launching wide-ranging attacks on Muslims in general....but downplay similar white extremist attacks.

When I looked at that thread about the Sydney attack, that's what I saw from @MattP - as quoted and as compared to his comments in this thread. The contrast is pretty extreme, frankly. Half-hearted quibbling and downplaying for this Quebec attack, but pure vitriol about the Islamist attack in Sydney. Now, Matt may know Sydney much better than Quebec....but he also links the attack to Islamist violence in Yemen and in Pakistan, to the alleged failure of the wider Muslim community to address terrorism, its acquiescence in paedophilia etc. I didn't "throw my toys out of the pram", Matt. I saw that as the promotion of Islamophobic hatred and found it genuinely repulsive (seriously, read and compare the 2 sets of comments).

 

Anyway, drama queen or not, I'm going to take an extended break from this place.

 

Real life seems to be pouring an endless pile of shit on my head recently, so that brings my mood down enough. Spending too much time on here doesn't help (my fault, clearly).

In different circumstances, I might have the patience to argue with views, like Matt's in this instance, that I find offensive - or the calm to ignore them without it affecting my mood.

I seem to be incapable of that so I'll flounce off for a "vacation".

Take care, all.  

Enjoy your break in the sunshine

[Jon the Hat]

2 hours ago, Jattdogg said:

Im glad that Trudeau called it as it is as opposed to other officials...

 

"This was a group of innocents targeted for practicing their faith. Make no mistake – this was a terrorist attack."

 

 

Who is terrorised though?  Is the Muslim community of Canada scared to go to the mosque?  One idiot doesn't terrorise, an invisible organisation that could strike again does.

this kid is a bigoted murderer.

[Carl the Llama]

9 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

Before I take a Foxes Talk sabbatical (drama queen, I know!), one final post of clarification in response to replies:

 

@Strokes @Webbo 

I don't see anything wrong with people not commenting on terrorist attacks or not expressing outrage. Terrorist attacks are obviously bad news whoever commits them, so expressing outrage seems a bit superfluous to me, too.

So, if I comment on such attacks, it's usually to discuss reasons why they might have happened or things that could be done to stop them happening again.

 

My point was about the contrast: certain people apparently not being bothered about heinous attacks by white extremists, but expressing great outrage at similarly heinous attacks by Islamists.

 

@bovril and @Babylon make a fair point that people are going to identify more with attacks in places and situations familiar to them (Paris, Christmas market etc.)

 

But for me, some people go way beyond that. They turn vitriolic about Islamist attacks and use them as a pretext for launching wide-ranging attacks on Muslims in general....but downplay similar white extremist attacks.

When I looked at that thread about the Sydney attack, that's what I saw from @MattP - as quoted and as compared to his comments in this thread. The contrast is pretty extreme, frankly. Half-hearted quibbling and downplaying for this Quebec attack, but pure vitriol about the Islamist attack in Sydney. Now, Matt may know Sydney much better than Quebec....but he also links the attack to Islamist violence in Yemen and in Pakistan, to the alleged failure of the wider Muslim community to address terrorism, its acquiescence in paedophilia etc. I didn't "throw my toys out of the pram", Matt. I saw that as the promotion of Islamophobic hatred and found it genuinely repulsive (seriously, read and compare the 2 sets of comments).

 

Anyway, drama queen or not, I'm going to take an extended break from this place.

 

Real life seems to be pouring an endless pile of shit on my head recently, so that brings my mood down enough. Spending too much time on here doesn't help (my fault, clearly).

In different circumstances, I might have the patience to argue with views, like Matt's in this instance, that I find offensive - or the calm to ignore them without it affecting my mood.

I seem to be incapable of that so I'll flounce off for a "vacation".

Take care, all.  

I'm sorry to hear about the people shitting on your head Alf, would you call that a capital movement?  In any case I hope the movements cease in due course.  

 

 

Oh and please don't be gone for too long!

[Guest MattP]

3 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

I saw that as the promotion of Islamophobic hatred and found it genuinely repulsive (seriously, read and compare the 2 sets of comments).

 

Anyway, drama queen or not, I'm going to take an extended break from this place.

 

Real life seems to be pouring an endless pile of shit on my head recently, so that brings my mood down enough. Spending too much time on here doesn't help (my fault, clearly).

In different circumstances, I might have the patience to argue with views, like Matt's in this instance, that I find offensive - or the calm to ignore them without it affecting my mood.

I seem to be incapable of that so I'll flounce off for a "vacation".

Take care, all.  

Please don't use the I word, I have no mental illness, that's what a phobia is, I'm not insane and no one I've spoken to on here is qualified to diagnose me with such.

 

If you or anybody wants to call me racist or bigoted towards Muslims then do so, I'm not remotely bothered about that, but I'm certainly of a sound mind when expressing those opinions that lead you to believe it.

 

Enjoy your break and hopefully see you soon.

[GazzinderFox]

4 hours ago, Strokes said:

#facistshavefeelingstoo

Without looking on the internet does anybody really even know what facism is? It's such a bloody lazy insult to throw around. I wish people would just say what they really mean - you have robust right wing views and I hate you for it.

 

Alternatively, people could just say you are Italian, you did a really good job of rebuilding a crap economy, you weren't so keen on newspapers and you picked the wrong side in WW2.

 

If a persons definition of facism is anything other than one of those two options then they're talking complete bollocks.

 

[Guest MattP]

4 minutes ago, GazzinderFox said:

Without looking on the internet does anybody really even know what facism is? It's such a bloody lazy insult to throw around. I wish people would just say what they really mean - you have robust right wing views and I hate you for it.

 

Alternatively, people could just say you are Italian, you did a really good job of rebuilding a crap economy, you weren't so keen on newspapers and you picked the wrong side in WW2.

 

If a persons definition of facism is anything other than one of those two options then they're talking complete bollocks.

 

It's just lazily thrown around alongside racist, nazi etc with no real thought. 

 

The terms have been used so widely and loosely they hold no serious meaning now anyway.

 

The words used to be a great weapon of the left, especially under the Blair years, it's vanished now and they are struggling to find an alternative. 

 

2016 was wonderful for so many reasons, but none more so that it seems to have been the year people felt able to express an opinion they used to be shouted down for with isms and ists, those days are now over.

[GazzinderFox]

20 minutes ago, MattP said:

It's just lazily thrown around alongside racist, nazi etc with no real thought. 

 

The terms have been used so widely and loosely they hold no serious meaning now anyway.

 

The words used to be a great weapon of the left, especially under the Blair years, it's vanished now and they are struggling to find an alternative. 

 

2016 was wonderful for so many reasons, but none more so that it seems to have been the year people felt able to express an opinion they used to be shouted down for with isms and ists, those days are now over.

I hope so Matt, but then when someone who refuses to admit they're wrong, runs out of arguments and yet carries on talking, they only have one logical fallacy left available to them...

 

If 2016 was the year that the wind blew hard in the face of urinating lefties everywhere, then I fear that 2017 is the year they pull up their flies too soon and start screaming retarded abuse at everybody stood there laughing at them.

[Carl the Llama]

1 hour ago, GazzinderFox said:

I hope so Matt, but then when someone who refuses to admit they're wrong, runs out of arguments and yet carries on talking, they only have one logical fallacy left available to them...

 

If 2016 was the year that the wind blew hard in the face of urinating lefties everywhere, then I fear that 2017 is the year they pull up their flies too soon and start screaming retarded abuse at everybody stood there laughing at them.

This sort of comment is entirely the problem.  So much hatred for people who disagree with you despite you apparently having a problem with that sort of attitude if your immediately previous comment is to be believed.  I mean, who is this one I've quoted even talking about?  I have to assume you're talking about Alf given how you got here from the mentioning of fascism in which case you clearly haven't actually read a single one of his posts if you think that first sentence in any way describes his approach to posting on here.

 

As for this:

1 hour ago, MattP said:

It's just lazily thrown around alongside racist, nazi etc with no real thought. 

 

The terms have been used so widely and loosely they hold no serious meaning now anyway.

 

The words used to be a great weapon of the left, especially under the Blair years, it's vanished now and they are struggling to find an alternative. 

 

2016 was wonderful for so many reasons, but none more so that it seems to have been the year people felt able to express an opinion they used to be shouted down for with isms and ists, those days are now over.

I mean wow, again who are you talking about?  When have you been "shouted down" for expressing an opinion and who by?  When have prominent left-wing political leaders used the terms racist, nazi and fascist as a "great weapon"?  I'll grant they're words that are overused on internet forums during often meaningless debates but that's something that's in no way politically exclusive.  That entire comment's just one big, nonsense, 'left-wing' straw man which adds no value to the conversation.  

 

Maybe, just maybe, these sorts of conversation where inaccurate portrayals of left-wing behaviour are bandied around as absolute truth and publicly belittled like we have some Orwellian propagandists patrolling the board and echo-chambering each others goodthink (another thing "lefties" are ironically accused of regularly) are the sort of thing that lead Alf to surmise that it can feel a little like FascistTalk on here sometimes.  I can't blame him for getting tired of it with the amount of effort he clearly puts in to enabling some sort of civilised non-confrontational debate on here.

[Jattdogg]

6 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

Who is terrorised though?  Is the Muslim community of Canada scared to go to the mosque?  One idiot doesn't terrorise, an invisible organisation that could strike again does.

this kid is a bigoted murderer.

They definitely wont shy from going to the mosque but you best believe they are worried due to the terror experienced. Will it happen again? Definitely going through their minds.   I mean this same mosque had a pigs head left on its doorsteps last year or so. Clearly someone or individuals in the community are out to terrorise ( even if its on a much smaller scale then your traditional terrorism scenario).

 

One idiot can terrorise. One idiot  can also be a bigoted murderer.  

 

To me its an act of terror but we can agree to diasgree on that point.

 

End of the day its a disgusting  act with an unfortunate and sad outcome for all.

 

 

 

 

[GazzinderFox]

6 hours ago, Carl the Llama said:

This sort of comment is entirely the problem.  So much hatred for people who disagree with you despite you apparently having a problem with that sort of attitude if your immediately previous comment is to be believed.  I mean, who is this one I've quoted even talking about?  I have to assume you're talking about Alf given how you got here from the mentioning of fascism in which case you clearly haven't actually read a single one of his posts if you think that first sentence in any way describes his approach to posting on here.

I fail to see the hate. But I do see 'tired and emotional' in you, mr cranky pants.

 

Fascism was my previous post, though it seems you have failed to read that properly as well, as I was talking about the general sort of person who liberally uses the word fascist with gay abandon each day. If you or anybody else has seen that as an a attack on Alf then you are badly mistaken. 

 

In what you have quoted above I had moved on to address Matts post about 2016 being the end of being shouted down. If you look carefully you will see that I was actually subtly disagreeing with him on that point.  

[GazzinderFox]

6 hours ago, Carl the Llama said:

When have prominent left-wing political leaders used the terms racist, nazi and fascist as a "great weapon"?

Cast your mind back to 1997. Remind me, if you were a conservative MP who wanted to raise the topic of immigration for discussion in the commons, what would the reaction have been from the Labour benches?