London terror attack
 

It finally happened...

It was pretty obvious we were going to have one at some point. Infact, I'm surprised it hasn't happened before now. 4 people dead so far.

doesn't surprise me at all

The attacker hasn't been identified as of now but not to be stereotypical but what evil religion has a habit of driving a car into a bunch of people? It'll probably come out later the attacker said "allahu ackbar" but yknow don't be islamiphobic. It's London it's going to be a place to attack i just hope we don't receive the same atrocities that other countries in Europe have had.

How did they know it was a terrorist? It could've been someone with serious mental issues

it's not known yet

many people just use terrorism for any major crime since that word has become so commonly used (even if incorrectly) for any general attack on people in public

Terrorism is apart of the motive used. In this case, and in many cases seen in the past few years, the only goal that can be seen is to cause fear or terror.
To explain this better, an act of terrorism is a crime , but a criminal act cannot necessarily be considered terrorism

lol it was probably a muslim

Yikes

Not trying to sound too cynical here but I hardly even react at this point.

Its just attack after attack nowadays.

don't jump to conclusions man think of all the radical christians out there stop being islamophobic

thank u

Terrorism requires political motive. Mentally ill people may commit major crimes but don't have political motive. There was no proof at that time (there still may be no proof, I don't know the current status) that it was a terrorist attack.

I stand corrected. Lucky guess.

The 'terrorist' involved was Islamic extremist Trevor Brooks.

p sure hes being sarcastic friendo

reset the clock

On it https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...6692aa9135.jpg

Terrorism doesn't require a political motive, at least according to modern media. Unless one considers a political state equal to a religious state. So in the case of ISIS, would one consider their actions terrorism, because they are not directly supported by a political state?
In most cases, the term "terrorism" is a subjective reality. One could consider anything that causes them fear or terror, to be terrorism.
It is defined by a state, thus it becomes political. However, it is not for political means, in cases of extremist groups.

ISIS is a terrorist organization because they despise the western way of life due to their government, freedom, sexualization in media, etc. They hate our way of life, their religion doesn't actually say to kill all who aren't Muslims. ISIS kills Muslims just as they do Christians and any religion. They don't have to be their own sovereign for it to be terrorism. Their motives have to be political, but they don't need to be their own state. They want to change our way of life. I saw some episode that talked about the rise of Muslim extremism and it said (I don't know if this is factual or not, though) that it started with this guy who moved to America I believe and saw how revealing the women's clothes were, the music, etc and hated the western culture.

But that entirely proves what I'm saying. Terrorism is defined by the state. However, it can be through religious motives. ISIS is Muslim and kill Muslims. These Muslims are Sunni muslims justifying the killing of Shia muslims through religious means. Though politics may be a factor, it is not what is causing the people to want to cause terror amongst another people group.

They hate Western government and culture, that is political in nature. They justify their actions through the Islamic religion. You're mistaking their justification for their motive. Terrorism is defined as the use of violence for political goals. Some religions say you should sacrifice humans, however that is not terrorism because there is no political goal. ISIS' attacks are terrorism because they have a political aim with their attacks.

It is not a mistake, it is simply reality. Motive and justification are aligned; though one may come after the other.

Radical Islam has been around since the death of Muhammad himself, and with the Sunni/Shia split. It started to become anti western with the spread of westernization in Europe, Africa, Asia and eventually the Americas.

I don't mean to be disrespectful, but the chance of it being a typical female driver is high.

Ripperoni

Hardly a "lol" moment.

It's all terrorism. Though the ulterior motive may be painted as such, especially by mainstream media, it is a continuation of the holy war.

This is exactly the reason why i despise living in big name cities. I feel like los angeles will be next

Jokes on them, I live in rural Texas

also for yall feuding about terrorism :
ter·ror·ism

noun
the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.

Apparently the guy posted a cryptic message about it on 4chan the night before:

http://i.imgur.com/MBf3F8y.jpg

wouldn't be suprised at all if that happened

bang pew pew (ﾒ` ﾛ ´)︻デ═一 ' . ''

how insensitive of you, Basi with an L

Jokes on you, that's clearly a paintball gun.

who else but isis

lmao, not as much as Radical Islam. You don't see most world leaders saying "We gotta end Radical Christianity" gg.

Quran (2:191-193) - "And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief or unrest] is worse than killing... but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone. But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun(the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)"

Lets all be honest guys religion is the main factor in half the wars so far, terrorist attacks, and racism due to the fact people cant read books right. Even though it would be lovely togo to a golden city when i die now adays the world would be better off without religion

As a Christian, I would like to point out the ignorance in this post.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/dispatc...kill-infidels/

Also:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-a6995111.html

Please don't bring religion into things when you havent even read the verse you're quoting. You'll just look like an idiot.
Try reading the verse before it to get some context:
“Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors.”
2:190
It's clearly talking about self defence. I'll make it easier for you, i'll put it in bold. Clearly this is in a context of war. You can't just go around killing people "for Allah".
If the other side has no intention of fighting, then it should be dropped. Damn, I apologise if this sounds a bit too extreme for you.
That isn't even the proper translation of the word fitna. Fitna means something like persecution/corruption.

I don't understand why people keep quoting this verse. It just refutes their own argument.

This was a horrible act but we must be relieved that he did not do it in rush hour, because if he did, many, many more people may have died.

Those biblical quotes are out of context. Especially considering that was meant for a singular group, not those outside the covenant.

If you're going to argue that Islam incites violence just based on the Quran, then you can just make the same point for Christianity with the Bible - however obviously next to no Christian extremists exist. I personally don't agree with a lot of what Islam teaches but I believe in free speech when it isn't harming anyone else, so as long as they aren't extremists (which the VAST majority aren't) then they can believe what they want.



Terrorism is horrible but fighting fire with fire just fuels the flames. By having these "travel" bans or carrying out air strikes on their country just gives them even more reason to hate western culture, it's so easy to radicalize people and turn them against us when our countries have killed their families and friends.

I wish religion didn't exist.

Believing in things is something you should keep to yourself instead of forming (religious)groups

isn't that the point? People cherry pick and say that Islam incites the violence that ISIS perpetrates, but I showed that you can do the same with the Bible.

Many white supremacists are Christians and use their Christian religion to justify it. That's especially true with the KKK. Many of them were "Christian extremists" for people who want to use that terminology. People have also blown up abortion centers, attacked doctors that perform abortions, etc and they justify it through the Christian religion. It's my personal opinion that there is nothing Christian about that and that they just used religion as an excuse to commit their sick desires to cause harm to others. Same goes with these "radical Islamic extremists".

Except religions have caused a lot of good. It gives people hope, happiness, and moral guidelines to follow that religious people hold higher than the laws of their land. Based on your logic, you shouldn't be sharing your opinion that you wish religions didn't exist. People are free to believe in whatever they want, not sure what harm it does for someone to ask you to believe in their religion. It's not as if ISIS is going to rational-minded people and turning them into killers. They're already likely to do evil things, extremist groups are just giving them the opportunity.

it happan so much in my country lucky for me not in the place i live

and the crusades ~V



"There are signs that Allah will grant Islam victory in Europe - without swords, without guns, without conquests. The 50 million Muslims of Europe will turn it into a Muslim continent within a few decades."

- Muamar al-Gaddafi

but yknow we can just ignore it right it's not like it's the fastest growing religion

Islam needs to be seen as a danger

Sure it has caused good things but nowadays in this day and time we'd be better off having no religion as far as I can tell.

@bold text
That entire statement literally makes 0 sense.
I stated that people are free to believe in whatever they want but shouldn't form religious groups.
People who can't believe on their own and feel the need to be part of a religious group in order to live just seem pretty unintelligent to me (I honestly don't even believe anyone requires religion at all though).

Also, nowadays most people are born into religion and didn't get the choice to decide their faith on their own.
Most of these people are basically brainwashed into believing things that have no proof of existing.
What I'm trying to say with this is, religion just seems like a way to brainwash people into following the believe of a specific group of people.
This counts for every single religion hence why I'm against religious groups as a whole even though there are smart individuals out there.

These are my thoughts/views on religion as a whole.
I know my opinion on this won't change so please don't bother trying to convince me otherwise.


Anyways my thoughts about terrorism are pretty simple.
As long as nobody close to me is involved I simply don't care about human lives that much.
(Close to me as in friends, family or even if something would happen near me)

Fact remains that you don't see Radical Christians bombing innocent civilians in record numbers.

Probably the most appropriately correct thing I've seen TomatoPanda say.

That's like quoting Hitler if you want to talk about any type of freedom - lovely.

Even though I despise ignorance.. nah nevermind, this forum is full of ignorance lol.