The ISIS threat to Europe

[Brumerican]

5 minutes ago, Chindie said:

I wouldn't say hell in a handcart, but I can't like this enough.

We aren't in the dark ages any more. There are gay people, and they've every right to exist as anyone else, and not be judged by anyone. Let alone a book, which in the same breath advocates despicable actions.

Yeah probably melodramatic wording on my part, but we aren't heading to a nice place are we ?. 

When literate , intelligent people can openly condemn homosexuality as a sin, based upon the info from stone age fairytales, then something is wrong. How many times do these atrocities have to happen before people stop focusing on the individuals and address the root problem . I realise it's going to be a nigh on impossible  task and will take generations but we need to start the ball rolling somehow .

First step . The abolishment of faith schools.

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

25 minutes ago, penguin said:

I actually think he's got this one wrong. These radicals have so many things on their 'hit-list' that the specific demographic that's been targeted this time is not the primary issue.

 

It absolutely is the primary issue and to say otherwise is to perpetuate the kind of erasure of LGBT people that mainstream culture seems so intent on doing. The killer was a known homophobe and targeted a gay nightclub. His links to 'radical Islam' are tenuous at best, and it seems (according to the President) that he self-radicalised, which just sounds to me like he just wanted justification for his violent intentions (his past behaviour also suggests his violent nature preceded any conversion to extremism).

That the mainstream news has twisted this into another Isis attack only helps bigots like Trump and any other **** that needs an excuse to stir up hate towards Muslims.

I'm tired of this thread. VT should know better.

[Brumerican]

Edit ...misread it .

 

Edited June 13, 2016 by Brumerican

[mjmooney]

43 minutes ago, Brumerican said:

Yeah probably melodramatic wording on my part, but we aren't heading to a nice place are we ?. 

When literate , intelligent people can openly condemn homosexuality as a sin, based upon the info from stone age fairytales, then something is wrong. How many times do these atrocities have to happen before people stop focusing on the individuals and address the root problem . I realise it's going to be a nigh on impossible  task and will take generations but we need to start the ball rolling somehow .

First step . The abolishment of faith schools.

100 x this. 

As for whether sexuality is a 'choice' or not - it's a pointless argument. Maybe it isn't, but there's no reason why it shouldn't be. I'm straight, and after 62 years I doubt that I'm going to suddenly decide to try bumming blokes - but I reserve the right to do so if I so choose. And it would no more be a 'sin' than if I chose to change my diet, or the way I dress, or the music I listen to. 

The "they can't help it" argument sounds too apologetic to me. 

[penguin]

16 minutes ago, CarewsEyebrowDesigner said:

It absolutely is the primary issue and to say otherwise is to perpetuate the kind of erasure of LGBT people that mainstream culture seems so intent on doing. The killer was a known homophobe and targeted a gay nightclub. His links to 'radical Islam' are tenuous at best, and it seems (according to the President) that he self-radicalised, which just sounds to me like he just wanted justification for his violent intentions (his past behaviour also suggests his violent nature preceded any conversion to extremism).

That the mainstream news has twisted this into another Isis attack only helps bigots like Trump and any other **** that needs an excuse to stir up hate towards Muslims.

I'm tired of this thread. VT should know better.

Should know better? Because I have an opinion differing to yours?

Tenuous at best? He'd been interviewed by the FBI twice and has been on the terrorist watch list due to radical islamist comments. ISIS have claimed responsibility for the attack, Amaq news agency claiming an 'Islamic State fighter' carried out the attack. ISIS have been urging attacks during Ramadan and the shooter, according to local law-enforcement, declared his allegiance to ISIS. To claim the link to radical Islam is 'tenuous at best' is burying your head in the sand. The media aren't 'twisting' anything, they are calling a duck a duck.

Your first sentence is a huge exaggeration and wildly wide of the mark, imo. I'm not denying the attack was homophobic but the primary issue, imo opinion anyway, is yet another idiot killing people in the name of a religion.

[MakemineVanilla]

4 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

100 x this. 

As for whether sexuality is a 'choice' or not - it's a pointless argument. Maybe it isn't, but there's no reason why it shouldn't be. I'm straight, and after 62 years I doubt that I'm going to suddenly decide to try bumming blokes - but I reserve the right to do so if I so choose. And it would no more be a 'sin' than if I chose to change my diet, or the way I dress, or the music I listen to. 

The "they can't help it" argument sounds too apologetic to me. 

Some people, no matter how they try to suppress their romantic and poetic natures, just can't help revealing it.  

[HanoiVillan]

Why can't it be both? Why can't he be an Islamist, and at the same time have committed an anti-gay hate crime? 

Obama called it 'an act of terror and an act of hate'. Seems fair to me. 

[Awol]

27 minutes ago, penguin said:

Should know better? Because I have an opinion differing to yours?

Tenuous at best? He'd been interviewed by the FBI twice and has been on the terrorist watch list due to radical islamist comments. ISIS have claimed responsibility for the attack, Amaq news agency claiming an 'Islamic State fighter' carried out the attack. ISIS have been urging attacks during Ramadan and the shooter, according to local law-enforcement, declared his allegiance to ISIS. To claim the link to radical Islam is 'tenuous at best' is burying your head in the sand. The media aren't 'twisting' anything, they are calling a duck a duck.

Your first sentence is a huge exaggeration and wildly wide of the mark, imo. I'm not denying the attack was homophobic but the primary issue, imo opinion anyway, is yet another idiot killing people in the name of a religion.

Exactly this. When all those kids were murdered in the Bataclan was it an attack on heavy metal fans, or a bunch of religious nutters slaughtering innocents? 

Were the suicide bombers at the Stade de France taking out a grudge against football fans?

The fact this guy targeted a gay club may have given him a margin of extra satisfaction, but his primary aim was the murder of innocents. The gunman didn't spare straight people.

I also think it's highly unlikely this guy was a random bloke who just flipped out and went postal. To walk into a crowded room alone then hit more than 100 live & moving targets, keep up a high rate of fire while changing magazines and moving are not the actions of a rank amateur. That takes nerve, discipline and intimate familiarity with assault weapons. 

Somewhere at sometime he's had a level of training beyond Call of Duty. 

[Awol]

3 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

Why can't it be both? Why can't he be an Islamist, and at the same time have committed an anti-gay hate crime? 

Obama called it 'an act of terror and an act of hate'. Seems fair to me. 

Quite, to be an Islamist is to be virulently anti gay, as anyone who has observed the flying lessons delivered in ISIS occupied territory knows very well. 

[chrisp65]

I'm impressed with the number of people here that know this guy's motives and thinking.

Can I just remind you to let the FBI know what you know, they appear to be a bit slower than VT and are still putting this thing together.

[chrisp65]

3 hours ago, omariqy said:

I am a Muslim and I think homosexuality is a sin. Now you may not agree or find that reprehensible but I am being completely honest.

I have a close personal friend that was born a sinner. Obvious to the rest of us from Junior school. He finally told us he was a sinner in his early twenties. He's a pillock, his nickname was sweetie since comp..

Currently sinning in Australia, the jammy bastard.

 

[penguin]

26 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

I'm impressed with the number of people here that know this guy's motives and thinking.

Can I just remind you to let the FBI know what you know, they appear to be a bit slower than VT and are still putting this thing together.

The same FBI who have already released a statement stating their are strong implications of radicalisation and insipiration by foreign terrorist groups? 

[chrisp65]

2 minutes ago, penguin said:

The same FBI who have already released a statement stating their are strong implications of radicalisation and insipiration by foreign terrorist groups? 

Yep, the same FBI that have recordings of phonecalls giving allegiance to the top dog in ISIS and allegiance to al Nusra.

The guy was a violent nutjob, clearly. Divorced due to mental problems and domestic violence according to reports from his ex wife. 

So, I'm not convinced yet that he knew what he was fighting for. Yet some here appear to already 'know'.

I'll wait a day or three.

To be clear, this isn't an excuse for anything the vile scumbag has done. Just trying to slowdown the rush to get this on any particular agenda beyond a terrible massacre of innocents in a gay club.

 

[Brumerican]

1 hour ago, mjmooney said:

100 x this. 

As for whether sexuality is a 'choice' or not - it's a pointless argument. Maybe it isn't, but there's no reason why it shouldn't be. I'm straight, and after 62 years I doubt that I'm going to suddenly decide to try bumming blokes - but I reserve the right to do so if I so choose. And it would no more be a 'sin' than if I chose to change my diet, or the way I dress, or the music I listen to. 

The "they can't help it" argument sounds too apologetic to me. 

You could go out and choose to make love to a man tomorrow . However the "choice" you made had already been made by your brain, which is just a biological  computer that acts in accordance to its genetic make up.  

Any choice is an illusion so to speak .

It wouldn't be a choice if you woke up gay tomorrow.  It would mean you were biologically programmed to be straight until you encountered an event that would flip something in your physiology. In this case it took you x amount of years to encounter that trigger event.

The brain controls you . It is you in fact . The thoughts and memories you have that give the illusion of you are just biological software programmes that still have to answer to the brain.

 

I realise it's bleak ...unless if you choose for it not to be .

[mjmooney]

5 minutes ago, Brumerican said:

You could go out and choose to make love to a man tomorrow . However the "choice" you made had already been made by your brain, which is just a biological  computer that acts in accordance to its genetic make up.  

Any choice is an illusion so to speak .

It wouldn't be a choice if you woke up gay tomorrow.  It would mean you were biologically programmed to be straight until you encountered an event that would flip something in your physiology. In this case it took you x amount of years to encounter that trigger event.

The brain controls you . It is you in fact . The thoughts and memories you have that give the illusion of you are just biological software programmes that still have to answer to the brain.

 

I realise it's bleak ...unless if you choose for it not to be .

Pretty much what I was getting at - the philosophically insoluble argument about free will. Does it exist, or is everything we do genetically pre-programmed? In practice it's irrelevant. So I don't mind people saying homosexuality is a lifestyle choice - BECAUSE THAT'S PERFECTLY OK!!! 

 

[Brumerican]

18 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

Yep, the same FBI that have recordings of phonecalls giving allegiance to the top dog in ISIS and allegiance to al Nusra.

The guy was a violent nutjob, clearly. Divorced due to mental problems and domestic violence according to reports from his ex wife. 

So, I'm not convinced yet that he knew what he was fighting for. Yet some here appear to already 'know'.

I'll wait a day or three.

To be clear, this isn't an excuse for anything the vile scumbag has done. Just trying to slowdown the rush to get this on any particular agenda beyond a terrible massacre of innocents in a gay club.

 

It all boils down to how can the humans with peaceful brains best be protected from  those with dangerous brains. Killing someone under any banner (racism, religion, sexuality etc) is due to a failure in the empathy genes and an overload in the anger department . We should be eliminating as many banners as possible to reduce the risk of these biological catastrophes.   

[Brumerican]

7 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

Pretty much what I was getting at - the philosophically insoluble argument about free will. Does it exist, or is everything we do genetically pre-programmed? In practice it's irrelevant. So I don't mind people saying homosexuality is a lifestyle choice - BECAUSE THAT'S PERFECTLY OK!!! 

 

Yeah it's a tricky one . Would have huge ramifications on things like prison etc if the neuro scientists started beating there drum a little louder. 

[chrisp65]

4 minutes ago, Brumerican said:

It all boils down to how can the humans with peaceful brains best be protected from  those with dangerous brains. Killing someone under any banner (racism, religion, sexuality etc) is due to a failure in the empathy genes and an overload in the anger department . We should be eliminating as many banners as possible to reduce the risk of these biological catastrophes.   

agree entirely

I just get pissed off really quickly with people, amateur experts, telling us all the why's and how's and claiming to have some sort of inside line on who was thinking what and whether he was trained or helped or funded and what his strategy was. All that schizz might turn out to be true. In the meantime, every whack job from Trump down is trying to look like an expert and push their angle and gain their edge.

Which I find a little annoying when 49 or 50 friends and family of someone somewhere have just been murdered for no 'real' reason.

[Brumerican]

9 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

agree entirely

I just get pissed off really quickly with people, amateur experts, telling us all the why's and how's and claiming to have some sort of inside line on who was thinking what and whether he was trained or helped or funded and what his strategy was. All that schizz might turn out to be true. In the meantime, every whack job from Trump down is trying to look like an expert and push their angle and gain their edge.

Which I find a little annoying when 49 or 50 friends and family of someone somewhere have just been murdered for no 'real' reason.

The media and politicians are only going to get worse IMO . Wont be long before you can pick multi tragedy live feeds available via the red button andnhave Trumps opinions injected into you down the post office.

[sharkyvilla]

4 hours ago, Brumerican said:

It's a biological quirk that is found throughout the animal kingdom. Are all the other species choosing to be gay as well ?

 

It's an interesting question, has homosexuality served an evolutionary purpose and been genetically handed down through generations e.g. the earliest human tribes leaving a homosexual male with the females while they go hunting (yes I am quoting Dawkins on this).  The irony of course of this is that by persecuting gay people so they live a lie and start families, the gene gets passed on.  Nonetheless I guess nobody really knows where homosexuality comes from, it could just be a quirk as you say.  It's not a sin though, what a load of arse gravy, that really makes my blood boil.