Orlando shooting + terrorism thread

hydro11

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="reprobate" data-cid="591220" data-time="1466766473">
<div>
indeed. and the strongest opposition to gay rights in western christian countries comes from christians, but there we are talking about peaceful first word places so it's a tad toned down.. except for the 3rd world violent country christians of course, they're less polite.
 
no doubt you'll call me an apologist. i'm not, i think religious people are nutters. but the issue is really combining nuttiness with people having backgrounds of acceptance of violence, poverty, and accessibility to weapons. buzzfeed is a heap of shit, (and so is arguing by anecdote for that matter) but when you meet people like this it makes tarring all muslims with the same brush a bit ridiculous:
<a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='https://www.buzzfeed.com/robstott/this-legendary-muslim-migrant-is-saving-the-world-one-meal-a?utm_term=.drq1Nq43K#.owW5d2oEP'>https://www.buzzfeed.com/robstott/this-legendary-muslim-migrant-is-saving-the-world-one-meal-a?utm_term=.drq1Nq43K#.owW5d2oEP</a>
 
yes, i very much reckon that most people in saudi arabia haven't murdered a gay. gays are a minor concern in the scheme of things in most of those places anyway, they could start by treating women properly, that's a much bigger % of the population. gay pride parades in russia and quite a few other non-muslim countries / communities wouldn't fly either.
</div>
</blockquote>
I think since we have been discussing Islam on here one of the crucial points most of us who have criticised Islam have made is that we are criticising the doctrine of Islam. We are not criticising all Muslims. The doctrine at its core is bad in many ways and good in a few ways too. This does not mean that everyone who says they subscribe to that doctrine is bad. People would only be bad if they tried to implement that exact doctrine.

gollum

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Tim" data-cid="591221" data-time="1466766684">
<div>
 
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Tim" data-cid="591083" data-time="1466739207">
<div>
<a class="bbc_url" href="http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-orlando-gay-fbi-20160623-snap-story.html">FBI investigators say they have found no evidence that Orlando shooter had gay lovers</a> 

</div>
</blockquote>
 
</div>
</blockquote>
 
Buried 10 paragraphs down (and very much not the headline), is also this - 
 
"But law enforcement sources did say that investigators have not uncovered any direct links between Mateen and members of Islamic State."

Tim

Oh dear god. He was a failure-man who dedicated his slaughter to them. He was from an Islamist family. I am not arguing that he was a networked member of ISIS, but it is pretty clear that he committed his crimes with at least a clear claim to be doing them in the name of a radical islamic group, with radical islamic justification for what he did.

gollum

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Tim" data-cid="591238" data-time="1466769532">
<div>
Oh dear god. He was a failure-man who dedicated his slaughter to them. He was from an Islamist family. I am not arguing that he was a networked member of ISIS, but it is pretty clear that he committed his crimes with at least a clear claim to be doing them in the name of a radical islamic group, with radical islamic justification for what he did.
</div>
</blockquote>
 
He was a fantasist who told people he was a member of various islamic groups (which he very much wasn't), he did very much pledge on the night he was doing it for ISIS. Those are literally the only 2 facts that are concrete.
 
You read back on this thread - and look at the press in the US, you'd think he was a card carrying member of ISIS working some Islamist master plan.
 
I'm not for a minute saying Islam had zero role in this, I'm saying the desperation to claim it is at fault 100% and this should justify a new war on Islam is WAY overboard & being (understandably) leapt on by those who stand to gain (Trump etc), those who want to justify their own views on the world & those too stupid to be able to grasp facts versus tweets.
 
And the reporting is terrible. How is "we can't find any links at all to ISIS" not a story but "Didn't have Grindr on his phone!" is?

Baron Silas Greenback

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="gollum" data-cid="591242" data-time="1466770782">
<div>
 
You read back on this thread - and look at the press in the US, you'd think he was a card carrying member of ISIS working some Islamist master plan.
 
 
</div>
</blockquote>
 
 
Just back to making stuff up Gollum? Who and where has anyone said or implied on this thread that he was a card carrying member of ISIS or was acting under direct instructions??
 
Nobody.
 
FFS.

Rancid Schnitzel

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="gollum" data-cid="591188" data-time="1466758362">
I'd agree if he implied he just liked them, but he didn't, he claimed he was affiliated with both. Which is like saying you are a member the KKK & also the Black Panthers. 
You ever been to Disneyland Orlando? Its literally gay heavan. And smack in the middle of the little Havana / Purto Rico section of the US... fat todlers & flaming latinos as far as the eye can see, all losing their shit over princess dress up</blockquote>No it isn't. The closest comparison would perhaps be a hardcore communist who just wanted to destroy capitalism and had pictures of Stalin, Mao and Tito on his walls. All had major ideological differences and hated each other, but some fanatic half a world away isn't going to give a shit. Same with this guy in Orlando. He probably just wanted to align himself with the big dogs and couldn't care less about what theological or geopolitical differences they had. Look at Breivik in Norway. That psycho just copied and pasted the shit he liked from all kinds of groups and people. It didn't make sense, but how can you apply logic to someone like that. 
As BSG just mentioned, not a single person here has claimed this guy was a sleeper agent, a card carrying member of ISIS or a terrorist mastermind. You're just making shit up to suit your own argument as well as latching on to any piece of "evidence", however flimsy, that you believe supports it. Which is ironic considering you've done nothing but accuse others of doing exactly the same thing.

Catogrande

I think we all agree that this mongtard was:-
 
1. Likely a gay
2. Definitely a muslim.
3. Definitely a nut job.
4. Had parental and religious issues.
5. Likely (and unilaterally) aligned himself with fanatical Islamic factions to justify his actions.
6. Found it far too easy to get his hands on an assault rifle.
 
The only thing we seem to disagree on is which is the more defining issue. I don't see this last bit as something that many of us are likely to change our minds on.
 
Edit: There is only one of those 6 points that if taken away by itself would have stopped the killing. Clue. it's number 6.

canefan

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Catogrande" data-cid="591410" data-time="1466839836">I think we all agree that this mongtard was:-

Likely a gay
Definitely a muslim.
Definitely a nut job.
Had parental and religious issues.
Likely (and unilaterally) aligned himself with fanatical Islamic factions to justify his actions.
Found it far too easy to get his hands on an assault rifle. 
 
The only thing we seem to disagree on is which is the more defining issue. I don't see this last bit as something that many of us are likely to change our minds on. 
 
Edit: There is only one of those 6 points that if taken away by itself would have stopped the killing. Clue. it's number 6.</blockquote>Damn I thought it had to be Islam

No Quarter

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Catogrande" data-cid="591410" data-time="1466839836">I think we all agree that this mongtard was:-

Likely a gay
Definitely a muslim.
Definitely a nut job.
Had parental and religious issues.
Likely (and unilaterally) aligned himself with fanatical Islamic factions to justify his actions.
Found it far too easy to get his hands on an assault rifle. 
The only thing we seem to disagree on is which is the more defining issue. I don't see this last bit as something that many of us are likely to change our minds on. 
Edit: There is only one of those 6 points that if taken away by itself would have stopped the killing. Clue. it's number 6.</blockquote>
 
Good post, but on your last point, you can make a very strong argument that if you take Islam out of the equation then the killing is stopped. You can also argue that if the gun he aquired was illegal then he would find another means of carrying out the killing (like others have in the past... bombs etc). 
The problem with Islam (and religion in general) is you can't make laws against it. Guns you can, so that is the thing people will jump on. But I honestly don't think better gun laws will stop nutters like this - it will help with other shootings that are either someone with the red mist and a gun on hand, or a child getting hold of a gun. But if someone is suicidal and wants to carry out a mass murder then there is not a lot you can do to stop them - it's a scary prospect.

jegga

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Catogrande" data-cid="591410" data-time="1466839836">
<div>
I think we all agree that this mongtard was:-
 
1. Likely a gay
2. Definitely a muslim.
3. Definitely a nut job.
4. Had parental and religious issues.
5. Likely (and unilaterally) aligned himself with fanatical Islamic factions to justify his actions.
6. Found it far too easy to get his hands on an assault rifle.
 
The only thing we seem to disagree on is which is the more defining issue. I don't see this last bit as something that many of us are likely to change our minds on.
 
Edit: There is only one of those 6 points that if taken away by itself would have stopped the killing. Clue. it's number 6.
</div>
</blockquote>
 
 
His wife taking him to gun shows, buying him ammunition and dropping him off at the club are bloody hard to fathom, if all thats true I hope she's due for a long stretch in prison.

Catogrande

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="No Quarter" data-cid="591651" data-time="1466851510">
<div>

Good post, but on your last point, you can make a very strong argument that if you take Islam out of the equation then the killing is stopped. You can also argue that if the gun he aquired was illegal then he would find another means of carrying out the killing (like others have in the past... bombs etc). Indeed, you are correct, but in this particular instance. No gun = no killings. Yeah, for sure he may have then gone and made a bomb or found another way of getting a gun, but, in this instance, no gun means no deaths. 
The problem with Islam (and religion in general) is you can't make laws against it. Guns you can, so that is the thing people will jump on. But I honestly don't think better gun laws will stop nutters like this - it will help with other shootings that are either someone with the red mist and a gun on hand, or a child getting hold of a gun. But if someone is suicidal and wants to carry out a mass murder then there is not a lot you can do to stop them - it's a scary prospect. I couldn't agree more. Sadly I do not see a way out of this for the US. The gun laws are just not going to meaningfully change and religion is a fucked up doctrine that will continue to cause strife all over the world.
</div>
</blockquote>

Baron Silas Greenback

No Islam means no deaths even more definitively.

Catogrande

Genetics would suggest otherwise.

Baron Silas Greenback

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Catogrande" data-cid="591928" data-time="1466899910">
<div>
Genetics would suggest otherwise.
</div>
</blockquote>
 
what?

Catogrande

I suspect that deaths will continue to occur if there was no Islam. We are all genetically destined to die.

canefan

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Catogrande" data-cid="592025" data-time="1466928921">I suspect that deaths will continue to occur if there was no Islam. We are all genetically destined to die.</blockquote>I thought you meant that people are people and we're really good at killing each other regardless of the excuse

Catogrande

Either works :yes:

gollum

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="canefan" data-cid="592026" data-time="1466929026">
<div>
I thought you meant that people are people and we're really good at killing each other regardless of the excuse
</div>
</blockquote>
 
Yep, 100% its that humans REALLY like killing each other. Throughout all of human history right up to modern times, you strip away serious constraints, we kill each other with staggering enthusiasm. Look at every failed state in the last 30 years (ie countries where the rule of law is removed) and everyone kills & rapes like there's no tomorrow. You dont even have to take the laws away for long, it doesn't have to be Rwanda or Kosovo, look at the tiny window that was huricane Katrina.
 
What religion does, and has always done, is give us an excuse.

No Quarter

Yup, so it'd be great to take away that excuse and start working on a society where we aren't obsessd with killing each other. I know a lot of people chuck it in the "too hard, people will always kill each other" basket but I would rather have a more positive outlook, and believe the "good" people in society can end up as the majority, not the minority.

gollum

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="No Quarter" data-cid="592335" data-time="1467017539">
<div>
Yup, so it'd be great to take away that excuse and start working on a society where we aren't obsessd with killing each other. I know a lot of people chuck it in the "too hard, people will always kill each other" basket but I would rather have a more positive outlook, and believe the "good" people in society can end up as the majority, not the minority. :)
</div>
</blockquote>
 
You need to take away 3 things.
 
The means
The excuse
The core of basic human nature
 
First of all I'd be taking away the means. Thats pretty easy. Its been done in most countries. As to how to take away the other 2, education and higher standards of living tend to work for religion. In particular seperating education from religion. The US is moving the opposite direction on that one.
 
As for changing basic human nature, same way you change any species. You selectively cull. You take the top 10% of the most agresive in your breeding population & kill or sterilise them. Repeat for 200 generations, congrats, you have changed a wild fox into a Jack Russell.
 
That ones pretty easy too really - tho' it will take 1000 years or so and involve some social adjustment re buying into it.

The Silver Fern

Orlando shooting + terrorism thread