Poll

Is "Get out of my country" = to "Allahu akbar?"

Yes.
1 (14.3%)
Both are associated with terrorism but are not equivalent.
2 (28.6%)
No.
4 (57.1%)
Other. Please explain....
0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 6

Author Topic: Is "Get out of my country" = to "Allahu akbar?"  (Read 234 times)

Offline msj

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 166
  • Location: Vancouver Island
    • View Profile
Is "Get out of my country" = to "Allahu akbar?"
« on: February 26, 2017, 11:06:04 am »
So, is "get out of my country" the white nationalist terrorist equivalent to "Allahu Akbar?"

I think they are substantially the same.

Background on this: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/02/24/get-out-of-my-country-kansan-reportedly-yelled-before-shooting-2-men-from-india-killing-one/?utm_term=.81fb82d8c817


I've gotta have more cow bell! -Bruce Dickinson

Social Buttons


Offline msj

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 166
  • Location: Vancouver Island
    • View Profile
Re: Is "Get out of my country" = to "Allahu akbar?"
« Reply #1 on: February 26, 2017, 11:13:29 am »
I met a woman when travelling in Ecuador in 2015.

She is originally from India, works for IBM, and lives in Kansas.

Fortunately her job takes her around the world - but I expect my wife will start seeing posts on FB about being detained when returning back to the US.

I hope she does okay and does not get between a white nationalist and his gun. 
I've gotta have more cow bell! -Bruce Dickinson

Offline bcsapper

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 93
    • View Profile
Re: Is "Get out of my country" = to "Allahu akbar?"
« Reply #2 on: February 26, 2017, 12:44:07 pm »
So, is "get out of my country" the white nationalist terrorist equivalent to "Allahu Akbar?"

I think they are substantially the same.

Background on this: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/02/24/get-out-of-my-country-kansan-reportedly-yelled-before-shooting-2-men-from-india-killing-one/?utm_term=.81fb82d8c817

I think that's a fair point.  Certainly both are equally deplorable, when applied as justification for such actions.

If only he had killed himself as well.
Time for bed said Zebedee...

Offline msj

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 166
  • Location: Vancouver Island
    • View Profile
Re: Is "Get out of my country" = to "Allahu akbar?"
« Reply #3 on: February 26, 2017, 12:54:24 pm »
Just like Islamist terrorists, if only white nationalists/racists would kill themselves first and not kill anyone else period. 

Preferably do so before they breed more idiots too.
I've gotta have more cow bell! -Bruce Dickinson

Offline cybercoma

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 371
    • View Profile
Re: Is "Get out of my country" = to "Allahu akbar?"
« Reply #4 on: February 26, 2017, 03:21:05 pm »
Allahu akhbar isn't some terrorist chant any more than "to God goes the glory" is a white nationalist chant.

Offline msj

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 166
  • Location: Vancouver Island
    • View Profile
Re: Is "Get out of my country" = to "Allahu akbar?"
« Reply #5 on: February 26, 2017, 07:19:02 pm »
Ok, to be more specific, I am only talking about the phrase "Allahu akbar" when an Islamist is blowing himself up, flying a plane into buildings, or otherwise killing civillians. 

Just as I have no problem with the British telling Trump to get out of their country (or, rather, don't come to their country) which is perfectly legitimate when it is not done with a smoking gun.

I've gotta have more cow bell! -Bruce Dickinson

Offline kimmy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 268
    • View Profile
Re: Is "Get out of my country" = to "Allahu akbar?"
« Reply #6 on: February 26, 2017, 07:35:16 pm »
So basically you're asking if hate-crimes intended to scare immigrants qualify as terrorist attacks?


I think there's a reasonable argument to make that yes, they could be considered terror attacks.  Much like abortion-clinic bombings/arson.
 -civilian targets
 -political motivation
 -intended to intimidate others into a course of action.

Of course, like abortion clinic bombings, most people won't actually call this terrorism, because as far as they're concerned it's only terrorism if there's  Muslims involved.

 -k
Agree Agree x 1 View List

Offline BC_cheque

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 101
    • View Profile
Re: Is "Get out of my country" = to "Allahu akbar?"
« Reply #7 on: March 08, 2017, 03:10:59 pm »
I voted both are associated with terrorism but different.

My rationale was similar to kimmy's in that the act is intended to cause fear. 

I would also add a couple of other commonalities.  First is the obvious sense of apathy and the second is the element of self-sacrifice for the greater good of a uniform society.  One wants everyone to look like them, the other want everyone to think like them, and both are willing to sacrifice themselves and kill in order to get there.

As a quick clarification, I know Islamic terrorism is a complex ideology and I'm not talking about revenge attacks in this comparison;  merely attacks in the name of an Islamic caliphate which I see similar to white nationalism.
« Last Edit: March 08, 2017, 03:30:01 pm by BC_cheque »

Offline SirJohn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 465
    • View Profile
Re: Is "Get out of my country" = to "Allahu akbar?"
« Reply #8 on: March 11, 2017, 11:37:53 am »

Of course, like abortion clinic bombings, most people won't actually call this terrorism, because as far as they're concerned it's only terrorism if there's  Muslims involved.

 -k

Oh not that old leftist cliche! There was lots of non-Muslim terrorism in the West when you were a baby and nobody ever hesitated to call it that, whether it was the FLQ here or the Baader Meinhof group in Germany or the Red Brigades in Italy or the Japanese Red Army. They committed organized, bloody violence.

The only reason people hesitate to call things like this 'terrorism' is because of the uncertainty about the motivation of the person who committed the act, and his associations or affiliation with any sort of group. What it seems like is some stupid mean drunk with a gun in the pickup who didn't like foreigners. Calling it terrorism seems like, I don't know, giving it an importance that this guy doesn't deserve. I don't think he planned anything nor was a member of any group, nor had any particular political philosophy other than a redneck dislike of anyone not like him.

Anyone who bombs an abortion clinic or shoots an abortion worker, on the other hand, is a terrorist. Why? Because those are planned and deliberate and such people are invariably imbued with the ranting and ravings of a variety of anti-abortion groups.

Offline kimmy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 268
    • View Profile
Re: Is "Get out of my country" = to "Allahu akbar?"
« Reply #9 on: March 11, 2017, 12:17:11 pm »
The only reason people hesitate to call things like this 'terrorism' is because of the uncertainty about the motivation of the person who committed the act, and his associations or affiliation with any sort of group. What it seems like is some stupid mean drunk with a gun in the pickup who didn't like foreigners. Calling it terrorism seems like, I don't know, giving it an importance that this guy doesn't deserve. I don't think he planned anything nor was a member of any group, nor had any particular political philosophy other than a redneck dislike of anyone not like him.

Is membership in some kind of group a requirement?  I thought that "lone wolf terrorism" was now a thing.  People were ok with calling Omar Mateen a terrorist, because even though he had no connection with any formal terror group, he was apparently inspired by ISIS or something.

If there were an effort to publish this message-- "foreigners get out of America!" -- to a broader audience in connection with the attack, would that make it a terror attack?

Anyone who bombs an abortion clinic or shoots an abortion worker, on the other hand, is a terrorist. Why? Because those are planned and deliberate and such people are invariably imbued with the ranting and ravings of a variety of anti-abortion groups.

And yet you never hear any government official or security official describe those things as terrorism. If attacks on abortion clinics were considered terrorism they'd be the runaway leader in terror attacks on US soil, by a wide margin.  Even when that guy went on a shooting rampage in Colorado Springs he was a "pro-life extremist", not a terrorist.

 -k

Offline SirJohn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 465
    • View Profile
Is membership in some kind of group a requirement?  I thought that "lone wolf terrorism" was now a thing.  People were ok with calling Omar Mateen a terrorist, because even though he had no connection with any formal terror group, he was apparently inspired by ISIS or something.

Because ISIS sets out to inspire their followers  to do this sort of thing, calls on them to do it, sends instructions in how to do it, and gives out approving press releases when they happen. Did anyone or group call in this guy to shoot a couple of foreigners? Did any group in America celebrate what he'd done? Did the KKK or some other group release a triumphant video or something?

This was just a stupid, mean drunk, unfortunately not entirely unlike many, many, many such we've seen in the US, who, upon being ejected for his shitty attitude, goes to the car, gets a gun, and comes back shooting.

Quote
And yet you never hear any government official or security official describe those things as terrorism. If attacks on abortion clinics were considered terrorism they'd be the runaway leader in terror attacks on US soil, by a wide margin.  Even when that guy went on a shooting rampage in Colorado Springs he was a "pro-life extremist", not a terrorist.
 -k

And why is it that whenever a Muslim terrorist is arrested some people rush to claim that he was really just mentally unbalanced - usually with no evidence. Meanwhile, this guy was found to be mentally unbalanced by a psychiatrist and confined to a mental institution, but you still want to call him a terrorist?

Abortion violence is intermittent, and not something most ordinary people fear. There have been less than a dozen deaths in history, seven in the last twenty five years, and hasn't roused the public's anxiety level. 9/11 raised the bar on what people fear, and targeted it at Muslims. And the Muslim world has done nothing since then, given more than 30,000 terrorist acts committed in the name of Islam, to change that.

Offline dia

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 157
  • Location: Fraser Valley
    • View Profile
Quote
And the Muslim world has done nothing since then, given more than 30,000 terrorist acts committed in the name of Islam, to change that.

I wonder how many civilians have been killed by western military forces since 9/11?   32,000?   200,000?   Two million?  Who knows, nobody is keeping track.    Why haven't the people of the US, Canada, UK, Australia, Russia done something to prevent those deaths?   Surely, we do not accept that it's ok to have 10s or 100s of thousands of innocent and non-military people killed to 'protect' our countries, which aren't even under attack in any real sense. 

On the other hand, research tells us that US citizens are more accepting of 'collateral damage', aka dead civilians, than are Muslims around the world.  Perhaps our habit of killing innocent people dwarfs that of Islamic terrorists, but we don't care.

http://www.psr.org/assets/pdfs/body-count.pdf

http://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/costs/human/civilians

http://www.middleeasteye.net/columns/unworthy-victims-western-wars-have-killed-four-million-muslims-1990-39149394

http://www.gallup.com/poll/157067/views-violence.aspx
“Neither a man nor a crowd nor a nation can be trusted to act humanely or to think sanely under the influence of a great fear.”
Bertrand Russell, Unpopular Essays

Offline SirJohn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 465
    • View Profile
I wonder how many civilians have been killed by western military forces since 9/11?   32,000?   200,000?   Two million? 

Most of them killed by Muslims. I mean, the US conquest of Afghanistan and Iraq was quick and caused few civilian deaths. What caused so many deaths was the brutality of the terrorist forces which attacked them without regard to collateral damage, and attacked each other. Most of those who died in Afghanistan and Iraq were killed by Muslims, not western military forces.

I've said it before. The West has no interest in the middle east other than to ensure a level of stability which allows the importation (at great cost) of oil. How they order themselves there is irrelevant to us over here as long as it doesn't interfere with oil exports. Western intervention is always a result of violence and chaos there caused by Muslims. A stable government able to police its own territory and which doesn't attack others is not going to have any trouble from the West.

Offline Omni

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 237
    • View Profile
Most of them killed by Muslims. I mean, the US conquest of Afghanistan and Iraq was quick and caused few civilian deaths. attack others is not going to have any trouble from the West.
That is such BS, but then you probably weren't there as I was. And if the US conquered Iraq and Afghanistan, why then are they both still in so much turmoil, and what do you suppose begat ISIS?

Offline msj

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 166
  • Location: Vancouver Island
    • View Profile
Here we find another old white guy trying to set fire to a convenience store to "run the Arabs out...."

Yet another idiot terrorist who is too stupid to understand that Quik E Marts are run by people from India.  ;D  :o

The only way to send this twit back to where he came from is to send him to buttf^ck Florida.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/11/us/muslim-florida-store-fire/index.html?sr=twCNN031217muslim-florida-store-fire0716PMVODtopLink&linkId=35399874

I've gotta have more cow bell! -Bruce Dickinson