Quantcast

The islamist terror threat - an massive lie?

rockwool

Turbo Monkey
Apr 19, 2004
2,658
0
Filastin
Of the 498 occurances defined as acts of terror last year only one (1) was commited by islamists. That is what an inquiry (investigation?) of last years terror acts and threats presented by the central police authority of the EU, Europol, has found out.

The biggest threat came from Frensch, Spanish and Brittish separatist movements, organizations that stod for more than 420 acts of terror and that were behind all acts with a deadly end.

The police authorities anti terror effort was however in large consentrated on islamists. In Spain, that was a target of 136 separatistic attacks last year and zero islamistic, twice as many persons with affiliation to islamistic terror organizations were arrested, in comparison to separatistic.

Europol defines terror as seriously politicly motivated acts of violence or threat.



http://www.europol.europa.eu/publications/TESAT/TESAT2007.pdf
 

ALEXIS_DH

Tirelessly Awesome
Jan 30, 2003
6,147
796
Lima, Peru, Peru
Yeah, in Europe, please disengage cranio-rectal interface.
wait... are you telling me, that just because IN europe ONLY there has been one islamic terror threat.... it means the "islamist terror threat" is a "massive lie"??.

take note on the lack of geographical limitations on the "massive lie part" and the preceding broad statement.

there has been no nuclear wars in Peru or inmediate surroundings ever!!! wait, does that mean nuclear warfare is a massive lie too???? :imstupid:
 

valve bouncer

Master Dildoist
Feb 11, 2002
7,843
114
Japan
wait... are you telling me, that just because IN europe ONLY there has been one islamic terror threat.... it means the "islamist terror threat" is a "massive lie"??.

take note on the lack of geographical limitations on the "massive lie part" and the preceding broad statement.

there has been no nuclear wars in Peru or inmediate surroundings ever!!! wait, does that mean nuclear warfare is a massive lie too???? :imstupid:
I wasn't talking to you pissflaps.
 

fluff

Monkey Turbo
Sep 8, 2001
5,673
2
Feeling the lag
Outside of actual war zones there probably haven't been that many Islamist terror attacks..

How many in Africa, Australia & South America?
 

MikeD

Leader and Demogogue of the Ridemonkey Satinists
Oct 26, 2001
11,669
1,713
chez moi
In Europe? Too bad Islamism is a global movement... And of course homegrown European separatist movements are more active in Europe. There are differences of magnitude in both method and intent that make Islamism a far greater threat to anyone who doesn't want to live under shari'a law.
 

rockwool

Turbo Monkey
Apr 19, 2004
2,658
0
Filastin
VITTU LOL, as they would say in Finland, what a thread!!

Still find it effing remarkable to say the least that 1/500 terror acts were islamistic. Judging from the news coverage it gets one would think it's the predominant terrorist threat over here, not to mention the attention the police is giving it, it must be massive?!!

It's hardly like there's a lack of Moslems in Europe that no more islamistic terror acts than that are commited.. Nah, they want people scared so that they can rule easily over them, they need that so that they can justify their wars and continuous defence spending. :disgust1:

I know at least one of you has seen the BBC documentary "The Power Of Nightmares". It was spot-on on this subject.

That islamism is global might be true, but about it being a massive threat to Europe is aparantly a massive lie. Of all the "terror" that they invoke, in the rest of the world that is, most of it would 60 years ago simply be called clashes with a resistance movement. Or am I totally wrong here?

Look in the former Soviet Union what is happening there and how some countries are using the word terrorist about some separatist movements. That is to strip them of their cause of fighting for a honorable thing (like many would percieve it and find legitimate) and turning them into monsters. At the same time they can wipe any foreing critisism of occupation, neo imperialism, or what ever, of with just one word.

Shari'a law on export, a Russian bear in Kaftan clothing? Both serve the same purpose.
 

MMike

A fowl peckerwood.
Sep 5, 2001
18,207
105
just sittin' here drinkin' scotch
Like there's even such a place a "Iraq". What a stupid name for a country....And then "Iran"...ooooohhhhh...RRRREAL original. Change one letter. Like anyone is supposed to believe that. The whole thing is being filmed on a Hollywood sound stage....
 

rockwool

Turbo Monkey
Apr 19, 2004
2,658
0
Filastin
Like there's even such a place a "Iraq". What a stupid name for a country....And then "Iran"...ooooohhhhh...RRRREAL original. Change one letter. Like anyone is supposed to believe that. The whole thing is being filmed on a Hollywood sound stage....
That's what I'm talking about, Iraq is another example of resistance movements that are being labled terrorists instead of what they've always been called. But what do you mean with Iran?
 

JRogers

talks too much
Mar 19, 2002
3,785
1
Claremont, CA
That's what I'm talking about, Iraq is another example of resistance movements that are being labled terrorists instead of what they've always been called. But what do you mean with Iran?
I think MMike was, umm, kidding.

No, that's pretty much the case. That's why the "war on terror" is absurd: you can't fight a concept. One man's terrorism is another's freedom fight. Fighters in the American Revolution would be considered "terrorists" by some if the word were in use then. Labeling someone a terrorist is a matter of perspective; if you support the group's goals, you're not too likely to be calling them "terrorists."

This shouldn't, however, absolve us of our ability to discern legitimate, justified actions against the opposite. I don't think that the people driving bomb-laden cars into markets are doing much of a service to their country, or that Hamas fighters are helping Gaza.
 

sanjuro

Tube Smuggler
Sep 13, 2004
17,373
0
SF
Of the 498 occurances defined as acts of terror last year only one (1) was commited by islamists. That is what an inquiry (investigation?) of last years terror acts and threats presented by the central police authority of the EU, Europol, has found out.
There was only one Islamic terrorist attack last year? Were there any in the last, oh, 6 years?

I guess there is nothing to worry about then.

Or that the US government is doing their job. You're welcome!
 

MikeD

Leader and Demogogue of the Ridemonkey Satinists
Oct 26, 2001
11,669
1,713
chez moi
No, that's pretty much the case. That's why the "war on terror" is absurd: you can't fight a concept.
.

I take that one step further...it's less than a concept...it's a tactic. Fighting a war on terror is like fighting a war on sucker punches, kicks to the balls, or platoon-level single-envelopment supported attacks.
 

DRB

unemployed bum
Oct 24, 2002
15,242
0
Watchin' you. Writing it all down.
That's what I'm talking about, Iraq is another example of resistance movements that are being labled terrorists instead of what they've always been called.
Using this logic, then you can pretty much call the entire list of 498 attacks "resistance" and not terrorism.

I'm sure that the logic exists that running a car bomb into a mosque, killing 61, injuring 100+ is part of the resistance but I'm too thick to see it.
 
Jun 15, 2006
28
0
hey, i got news for all yous guys, the U.S highway sytem is 10,000 times more of a threat to your safety than any iraq iran iwalked combined. think about it for a sec, how many people die each year behind the wheel? now, how many people die, here in the u.s, from islamic terrorists?????
 

MikeD

Leader and Demogogue of the Ridemonkey Satinists
Oct 26, 2001
11,669
1,713
chez moi
Wow, brilliant.

The US highway system doesn't want to destroy my country and put my wife in a burqua.

You'll note I'm not a fan of a lot of the things the US government has done vis a vis Islamism. This doesn't mean there's not a threat. Hell, we've done a lot to make it even more viable of a threat.
 

Silver

find me a tampon
Jul 20, 2002
10,840
1
Orange County, CA
Wow, brilliant.

The US highway system doesn't want to destroy my country and put my wife in a burqua.

You'll note I'm not a fan of a lot of the things the US government has done vis a vis Islamism. This doesn't mean there's not a threat. Hell, we've done a lot to make it even more viable of a threat.
Well, as long as we don't make the mistake of arming them and giving them military support again, we'll be fine...I'm sure we've learned from past mistakes, right?
 
Jun 15, 2006
28
0
exactly, weve made any enemies we have, theres not just some people on the other side of the globe wanting to kill you for no reason, look to your own government for the reasons they hate you. this is so pathetic, americans up in arms over some people on the other side of the globe all because the media spins it the way the gov wants it. youd hate people from other countries too if all they did was disarm you and invade your country. who would you be if the taliban was in the streets? youd be the freedom fighter, or to them youd be the terrorist.
but lets not forget, the tal;iban arent in the streets, its the US gov in the streets. this whole situation is invalid, just like most stuff thought up by corrupt old white men.


p.s---mike, the taliban cant destroy your country, great logic in that thinking though, cause they could all come over at once, all 7 of em and nuke most major cities right?
 

DRB

unemployed bum
Oct 24, 2002
15,242
0
Watchin' you. Writing it all down.
exactly, weve made any enemies we have, theres not just some people on the other side of the globe wanting to kill you for no reason, look to your own government for the reasons they hate you. this is so pathetic, americans up in arms over some people on the other side of the globe all because the media spins it the way the gov wants it. youd hate people from other countries too if all they did was disarm you and invade your country. who would you be if the taliban was in the streets? youd be the freedom fighter, or to them youd be the terrorist.
but lets not forget, the tal;iban arent in the streets, its the US gov in the streets. this whole situation is invalid, just like most stuff thought up by corrupt old white men.


p.s---mike, the taliban cant destroy your country, great logic in that thinking though, cause they could all come over at once, all 7 of em and nuke most major cities right?
good lord, what's under attack is America's education system.
 

MikeD

Leader and Demogogue of the Ridemonkey Satinists
Oct 26, 2001
11,669
1,713
chez moi
You've just made a great case as to why there *is* a threat. I never said Islamists were lunatics who didn't have their own justifications or anything. Doesn't change the fact that they'd kill you if they could...you're a fair target in their minds.

Who said the Taliban can destroy my country (esp. right now)? I said they want to. And they will keep trying for as long as they're alive. We should fight that with all available means (the most important of which is denying them the sympathies and support of the larger Islamic world...doing a cracking job on that one...) And if they hit a major symbolic target in the US or abroad every 5 years, you know, that will weaken the economy and hurt stability here.

You're suffering from underdog syndrome too badly for this conversation to continue.
 

rockwool

Turbo Monkey
Apr 19, 2004
2,658
0
Filastin
You're suffering from underdog syndrome too badly for this conversation to continue.
I know you wasn't adressing me with that but I'll say something about it. Schnarfy summed it all up pretty good, you might not like what he said but no syndrom of any kind is needed to come to his conclusion, it's all logal and if you mirrored the current situation as he did you would actually have what you're talking about; your wife in a burqa and you raped and abused by Taliban marine corps in a prison.

What you suffer, including a few others here, together with the titel of this thread was a bit of US-centrism (in my case Euro-centrism). When I wrote the title I was thinking only about the surroundings of where I live, unthoughtful, yes. Some of you have missed that this report was presented by EUROPOL and is about terrorism in EUROPE.

1/500 terror acts in 2006 had an islamistic connection to it, and that's how real the islamist threat is in black and white, no bs added, and the info came straight from the authority on the subject from the islamists opposing side.

I find it remarkable that people aren't reflecting on those facts and got all hooked up on the title?!! Read the MF text, read who wrote it and check out on which home page it is. It's not the FBI's nor the Interpol's. What has been discused is interesting but you seem to have missed what it's about. Would be really interesting to se a similar report from the FBI; how many acts of terror there were, how many arrests, arrests of whom etc.
 

ohio

The Fresno Kid
Nov 26, 2001
6,649
23
SF, CA
MMike hasn't made a joke in his whole life, excuse me for missing his first. ;)
Exsqueeze me? There are a whole lot of things one could say about MMike, but that he doesn't make jokes is not one of them.

He doesn't make GOOD (intelligible, coherent, logical, relevent, etc.) jokes, yes, but I don't think I've ever read anything he's written that wasn't a joke.
 

MikeD

Leader and Demogogue of the Ridemonkey Satinists
Oct 26, 2001
11,669
1,713
chez moi
I know you wasn't adressing me with that but I'll say something about it. Schnarfy summed it all up pretty good, you might not like what he said but no syndrom of any kind is needed to come to his conclusion, it's all logal and if you mirrored the current situation as he did you would actually have what you're talking about; your wife in a burqa and you raped and abused by Taliban marine corps in a prison.
You're taking the issues and polarizing them, while mixing issues that aren't inherently mixed.

Somehow, you pair the notion of acceptint the existance of an Islamist threat with an acceptance of the US government's policies. Those two things aren't inherently related. You're being contradictory in saying that the US is instigating a threat while insisting there is no threat. I don't know how I can continue to talk about this.

I know if I was an Islamist or even an Iraqi (great lumping together of all different sorts of middle eastern/central asian enthic/political/religious affiliations by Schnarfster, by the way... putting Iraqis and the Taliban in one big lump is the kind of thinking that would make a Fox News writer proud...) I would be upset with and possibly actively fighting against the US in my own country or in the enemy's. That kind of means there's a threat, right?

Look, I'm an extremely reasonable person. Lord Opie and I fought bitterly one time when I insisted the Israelis had a huge part in creating the conditions which so plauge them now. However, I also don't think the Israelis have to now cede their national existance because of mistakes made 60 years ago. And just because I understand that Iraqis have an issue with the US's policies and conduct in the invasion (pretty valid issues, IMHO) doesn't mean that I have to accept the behavior of some Iraqis killing other Iraqis, or even their attacks on US servicemen--I understand them, but that doesn't mean I have to like them. Nor do I have to accept the Islamist worldview and intent (which I may die fighting). ED: notice the Islamist threat is a different issue than the conflict in Iraq. I agree that there's been a public political equation of the two by politicians--that's how the war started, really--but that's BS. Still doesn't mean that Islamism is somehow not a threat...just means we ignored the real threat and took a huge mis-step politically, socially, militarily, economically, and in every other way I can think of.

And because you're in a Western country, you have the luxury of mentally subordinating the real, physical threat posed to you by these fanatics to your political hatred of Bush and Co. Believe me, if I was going to lock you in a room with a bunch of Islamists or the US cabinet, you'd be a lot better off with the cabinet. Dick Cheny wouldn't cut your head off for Al-Jazeera publication or demand you stay ignorant and poor. He'll just shoot you in the face lightly and send you on your way to make money for the economic machine.
 

MikeD

Leader and Demogogue of the Ridemonkey Satinists
Oct 26, 2001
11,669
1,713
chez moi
Also, with terrorism as with the stock market, past performance is no indication of future performance. I don't understand how any of the numbers mean Islamism isn't a threat. Since 1998, we've had attacks on US embassies, Spanish and London mass transit attacks, two attacks on the World Trade Center, the Cole bombing, Indonesian nightclub bombings, and even innmerable suicide attacks in Israel (could be considered separatist/local conflict, so maybe leave those out if you want), and somehow Islamism isn't a threat, simply because you correlate the European numbers against those generated by separatist movements?

One really has nothing to do with the other...and again, the magnitude of both the acts and the goals put separatism and global Islamism on entirely different planets.
 

MikeD

Leader and Demogogue of the Ridemonkey Satinists
Oct 26, 2001
11,669
1,713
chez moi
Holy ****. I actually just read the report. It's anything BUT a minimization of the Islamist threat. In fact, it points out, throughout the ENTIRE document, the minimal intent to kill and destroy by the multiple separatists over the larger and more deadly goals of the Islamists. It also points towards the growing radicalization of Muslim youth born in Europe and elsewhere outside the middle east.

Scrape the ****ing bong resin out of your brain.
 

JRogers

talks too much
Mar 19, 2002
3,785
1
Claremont, CA
Scrape the ****ing bong resin out of your brain.
I had perused this the other day and came to something of the same conclusion. After looking more closely, I really don't see how the title of the thread is in any way supported by the report cited.

eg: "The vast majority of [terrorist attacks] resulted in limited material damage and were not intended to kill. However, the failed attack in Germany demonstrates that Islamist terrorists also aim at mass casualties".

"Investigations into Islamist terrorism are clearly a priority for Member States law enforcement..."
 
Jun 15, 2006
28
0
mike, why cant we continue, just cause i donts write as good as you do?? cmon, typing isnt a big deal to me, soory. anyway, no need to get all hot and nasty, i just think that the us gov has made you fearful of islam, iraq, iran etcd.. for their gain, not because they really want to protect you as a citizen. theyre only reving you up so that when they bomb iran, youll be like yeah, go america, kill those anti americans terrorists.
i just think its short sighted to buy into anything a polotician tells you. when is the last time you felt uneasy or unsafe because of islamic militants????? never?? me neither.
how many americans murderd people this year?
how many people died on 9-11?? how does this stack up statisticly to americans murdered by americans??
wheres the plane that hit the pentagon???
if your so gung ho, how come your not there fighting??
these are fun questions i like to ask myself everytime the bill oreilys of the world open their mouths with questions of patriotism and us world domination.



for a picture of how i see the us and its gov, just put all of em in nazi uniforms, because if you dont think were headed for a police state based on false presumptions(enter alquieda) your wrong. now, go ahead and kretisize mie riting oll yu wunt, but im right, because im logiacl, and pretty.
 

MikeD

Leader and Demogogue of the Ridemonkey Satinists
Oct 26, 2001
11,669
1,713
chez moi
When you actually read, or are capable of comprehending, what I wrote, I'll consider it. I have never in my life seen so many non-sequiturs packed into such a small space.