• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

OT: The News Thread

We are directly funding the extremist ideology that we are futilely trying to fight on multiple fronts right now. Remove the energy incentive for propping up that corrupt regime and you cut off their financial ability to fund these Wahhabist indoctrination factories around the globe. That state is literally useless economically-speaking aside from oil.
 
I don't think it's a valid comparison because domestic gun violence and terrorism don't have the same etiology.

So what?

You are saying that Islamic fanatics are our biggest problem right now. I am saying that while it is a huge problem, the data does not support the notion that it is the biggest threat to our security.
 
So what?

You are saying that Islamic fanatics are our biggest problem right now. I am saying that while it is a huge problem, the data does not support the notion that it is the biggest threat to our security.

I didn't say that it was the biggest threat right now. I said that that we don't need additional violence (on top of our own domestic urban gang warfare, etc), and that long-term, if we don't get smarter, Islamic fanaticism/terrorism would become the biggest threat. By saying "if we don't get smarter", I'm referring to irresponsible decisions by some nations to allow large numbers of immigrants/refugees/economic migrants from muslim majority countries.

Etiology is very relevant here because we can reduce further Islamic fanaticism by just not allowing muslims in our country (or my preference, to decrease the numbers, and ensure these people are vetted really well). On the other hand, I'm not sure what we can do to stop gang violence, and the reason for that is that its cause(s) are different. So, I don't see how it's relevant to compare how many people die from gang violence to Islamic terrorism. And I don't see how it's logical to say because x causes more deaths right now, y is being over-blown.
 
Last edited:
I didn't say that it was the biggest threat right now. I said that that we don't need additional violence (on top of our own domestic urban gang warfare, etc), and that long-term, if we don't get smarter, Islamic fanaticism/terrorism would become the biggest threat. By saying "if we don't get smarter", I'm referring to irresponsible decisions by some nations to allow large numbers of immigrants/refugees/economic migrants from muslim majority countries.

Etiology is very relevant here because we can reduce further Islamic fanaticism by just not allowing muslims in our country (or my preference, to decrease the numbers, and ensure these people are vetted really well). On the other hand, I'm not sure what we can do to stop gang violence, and the reason for that is that its cause(s) are different. So, I don't see how it's relevant to compare how many people die from gang violence to Islamic terrorism. And I don't see how it's logical to say because x causes more deaths right now, y is being over-blown.

Yeah, that's a huge assumption. There are plenty of Muslims who already live in all areas of Europe and North America. Many of these individuals are getting radicalized right at home and committing these crimes. The whole "ban Muslims" and everything will become great again is a myth. This doesn't even include the non-Muslims who convert. It's much more complicated than what you are suggesting.

So yeah, I don't think it's unreasonable to compare the relatively small number of deaths as a result of Islamic fanatics vs the much more prevalent (and frankly more likely threat to all of us) at home.
 
There are plenty of Muslims who already live in all areas of Europe and North America. Many of these individuals are getting radicalized right at home and committing these crimes

This is true. In fact, a lot of the terrorists are home-grown. But as you say they are getting radicalized by their Islamic clerics and other muslims in those European countries. Again, solution is the same.

Ultimately, all I'm saying is, prevention is better (especially when you know the etiology at least generally). I don't like the idea of just ignoring the cause, just letting it be, and then having to deal with all the ramifications once that disease spreads.
 
This is true. In fact, a lot of the terrorists are home-grown. But as you say they are getting radicalized by their Islamic clerics and other muslims in those European countries. Again, solution is the same.

Ultimately, all I'm saying is, prevention is better (especially when you know the etiology at least generally). I don't like the idea of just ignoring the cause, just letting it be, and then having to deal with all the ramifications once that disease spreads.

I agree that it's a problem. I would even say it's a big problem. And I agree that preventative actions are always better than reactive solutions. All I'm saying is that you are much more likely to die from domestic violence than terrorism. At least in North America. But if you listen to the talking heads, the perception is that this is the biggest threat to our survival. Which simply isn't true. And banning Muslims from passing through our borders doesn't solve anything.
 
You do realize that Leafovic is a Bosniak Muslim from the former Yugoslavia, right? And that he was involved in a religious war that had numerous instances of ethnic cleansing?

I'm assuming he understands the Muslim experience in North America just fine from his own personal experiences.
 
You do realize that Leafovic is a Bosniak Muslim from the former Yugoslavia, right? And that he was involved in a religious war that had numerous instances of ethnic cleansing?

I'm assuming he understands the Muslim experience in North America just fine from his own personal experiences.

I am from Iran and am living in North America. I don't need to check people's credentials when it comes to the Muslim experience in North America when arguing the points.

The fact is you are way more likely to die from domestic violence walking down the streets of New York vs. a suicide bomber. Yet we pay much less attention to that and all of our attention on Islamic fanatics.
 
I am from Iran and am living in North America. I don't need to check people's credentials when it comes to the Muslim experience in North America when arguing the points.

The fact is you are way more likely to die from domestic violence walking down the streets of New York vs. a suicide bomber. Yet we pay much less attention to that and all of our attention on Islamic fanatics.

So lets pay less attention to them?

I'm not understanding. 1 individual killing 1 person vs 1 individual killing himself while killing a 100. Stats say i'm more likely to be killed by a piece of furniture than by a terrorist but stats go out the window on any given day when things happen to you the individual. I am that ONE individual that anything can happen too.
 
So lets pay less attention to them?

I'm not understanding. 1 individual killing 1 person vs 1 individual killing himself while killing a 100. Stats say i'm more likely to be killed by a piece of furniture than by a terrorist but stats go out the window on any given day when things happen to you the individual. I am that ONE individual that anything can happen too.

Yeah, I don't think the media attention this stuff is getting meets the actual threat it poses to our lives.
 
I am from Iran and am living in North America. I don't need to check people's credentials when it comes to the Muslim experience in North America when arguing the points.

The fact is you are way more likely to die from domestic violence walking down the streets of New York vs. a suicide bomber. Yet we pay much less attention to that and all of our attention on Islamic fanatics.

Both are unlikely circumstances, but we pay attention to the latter because it represents a threat that has a great deal of symbolism to it. You can invest in programs that reduce domestic violence while at the same time investing in counter-terrorism activities.
 
Yeah, I don't think the media attention this stuff is getting meets the actual threat it poses to our lives.

The horrific manner in which people are dying has a great deal of meaning to it. We don't mind everyday dangers because they're accepted as a ordinary part of living. Terrorism is not.
 
The horrific manner in which people are dying has a great deal of meaning to it. We don't mind everyday dangers because they're accepted as a ordinary part of living. Terrorism is not.

Getting gunned down by somebody is a part of daily life? What is the difference between a drive by shooting in downtown Toronto and a guy blowing himself up on said street? Both are despicable acts that are outside our normal way of life. One is way more likely than the other, yet we spend all of our time on the other. I agree we can walk and chew gum at the same time, but I just don't subscribe to the sensationalism and fear mongering this topic has received.
 
What is the difference between a drive by shooting in downtown Toronto and a guy blowing himself up on said street?

In the latter, you're the target. There are basically two major categories of murders. Drug industry and domestic. If you're not involved in the drug trade, you're far more likely to be murdered by a friend or family member than anyone else.

So what's the difference? If you're getting killed in a drive by in Toronto, statistically speaking, you're a criminal and this was over drugs/money.
 
Getting gunned down by somebody is a part of daily life? What is the difference between a drive by shooting in downtown Toronto and a guy blowing himself up on said street? Both are despicable acts that are outside our normal way of life. One is way more likely than the other, yet we spend all of our time on the other. I agree we can walk and chew gum at the same time, but I just don't subscribe to the sensationalism and fear mongering this topic has received.

I'm not black (unfortunately most murders committed in Toronto are black on black turf/narcotics violence) and I'm not involved in the drug trade, to put it less than diplomatically, so the chances of me getting killed in a drive-by shooting in Toronto are around the same likelihood as being killed by a terrorist attack in this country.

Jane Creba's accidental public death is actually less than the amount of deaths caused by terrorists in Canada in 2014, for instance.

Mindz basically illustrated it perfectly above.
 
In the latter, you're the target. There are basically two major categories of murders. Drug industry and domestic. If you're not involved in the drug trade, you're far more likely to be murdered by a friend or family member than anyone else.

So what's the difference? If you're getting killed in a drive by in Toronto, statistically speaking, you're a criminal and this was over drugs/money.

Yeah, you may be more likely to get targeted if you are part of the drug trade/are black. But collateral damage happens all the time. Take Drake's event last year where that young girl (who was trying to get a cab) was shot dead. She wasn't targeted or part of any drug dispute.

How many deaths have we seen due to terrorism in this country? Even in the States, the number will likely surprise many people. The issue is that people are afraid of that number rising in the future because of this so called global threat. Which is not impossible, but unless these things start happening at an exponentially higher rate, I'm not going to worry about it. I suspect we wouldn't have all of it shoved down our throat as often as it has if it wasn't an election year in the States.
 
I can post the chart if necessary, but there are have literally been 1000x more deaths due to domestic gun violence vs. acts of terrorism over the last decade.

I'm not comfortable chalking that entire difference up to gang on gang violence, even though it may make up a good chunk of the numbers.
 
How many deaths have we seen due to terrorism in this country? Even in the States, the number will likely surprise many people. The issue is that people are afraid of that number rising in the future because of this so called global threat. Which is not impossible, but unless these things start happening at an exponentially higher rate, I'm not going to worry about it. I suspect we wouldn't have all of it shoved down our throat as often as it has if it wasn't an election year in the States.


You're not worried about it getting worse because you're confusing the symptom and the disease. For you, terrorism is the disease, and in your view, it's not serious right now. But terrorism isn't actually the disease, it's the symptom of the disease. The disease is the act of allowing a vast number of immigrants/refugees/economic migrants from muslim majority countries, and thinking you won't have a lot of civil unrest and violence/terrorism. Most of these people have values that we would find totally disgusting, and totally against everything we believe in. I'm worried about these people living in our society long-term. Terrorism is just one behavior that occurs when you totally messed up values, but it's not the only problem.
 
Last edited:
You're not worried about it getting worse because you're confusing the symptom and the disease. For you, terrorism is the disease, and in your view, it's not serious right now. But terrorism isn't actually the disease, it's the symptom of the disease. The disease is the act of allowing a vast number of immigrants/refugees/economic migrants from muslim majority countries, and thinking you won't have a lot of civil unrest and violence/terrorism. Most of these people have values that we would find totally disgusting, and totally against everything we believe in. I'm worried about these people living in our society long-term.

Yeah, if you actually believe this then there is nothing more to discuss.
 
Back
Top