France 30 Killed 100 Injured

hoichi said:
the thing about terrorism terrorist usually dont get until after it starts is terrorism is a tactic that anyone can use.
Click to expand...

Yes, but it needs to be for the purpose of changing government/political.

hoichi said:
besides true accidents their is always intent when it comes to murdering people.
if you murder someone for a 5 piece of rock that maybe common, sure but its not terorism, if you take out a school with the intent to sway a government. then thats terrorism

its a simple concept for me.
Click to expand...

No doubt, and I agree. Yet, as mentioned before, in this fictional example, the guy only did it because the color of the school offended him... let us say that he was heard saying that someone should blow up the school because the color was so ugly it was offensive. This by no means is terrorism. Just another senseless loss of life.

hoichi said:
what now we are just being clever layers, the difference between reflecting a cause or an ideology you kill in the name of..and actuality killing for that ideology or cause is what?
Click to expand...

Government and political influence is but a single cause/ideology, so not all acts of violence is terrorism. the fact that people and governments the world over seems to be allowing every action control them does not mean that every act of violence is terrorism.
If the person does not have the same goals and objectives as the cause/ideology then it is not for that cause/ideology... thus cannot be called for that cause... it gives less to the actual enemy... terrorist.

hoichi said:
how one wins matters.
Click to expand...

Yes... but is nuking actual terrorism or just war... I mean until we start fighting war using sock puppets all war is terrifying...

hoichi said:
thats a personal example i was more asking regarding france. where witch hunts occurring..
none at all.
Click to expand...

you asked, I answered... you cannot cotton pick the response. :) Have I seen evidence of witch hunting .. yes. Lone girl writing evidently is plotting to take over the world through her terrorist writing of trying to figure out where to write a line.... the horror!

hoichi said:
media is media they actually are not that quick..
cnn wasn't calling the attack yesterday terrorist, french news was, canadian news was, cnn were claiming. "criminal".long after other news sources were telling the truth of i
Click to expand...

Possible, I do not recal who said what or where they were from ... I do know the Fox and a few others did... I was looking for ones that did not say Terrorist attack in France... was sadly hard... so yes, media was quite fast on calling it a terror attack even though, even at this time, we only have evidence of it being a mass killing.
 
Jezie said:
Yes, but it needs to be for the purpose of changing government/political.
Click to expand...

no it can also be to influence gov policy or tit for tat violence against gov polices.
rarely does it ever actually change gov polices.


Jezie said:
No doubt, and I agree. Yet, as mentioned before, in this fictional example, the guy only did it because the color of the school offended him... let us say that he was heard saying that someone should blow up the school because the color was so ugly it was offensive. This by no means is terrorism. Just another senseless loss of life.
Click to expand...

alright well i have an example of a guy who gets upset with pickles and ecided to go rape others where it counts with pickles...lots of big huge kosher pickles..(better in sign)

is this terrorism?
regardless its pickles... and its not the real world
why not keep our examples to the real world|?

Jezie said:
Government and political influence is but a single cause/ideology, so not all acts of violence is terrorism. the fact that people and governments the world over seems to be allowing every action control them does not mean that every act of violence is terrorism.
If the person does not have the same goals and objectives as the cause/ideology then it is not for that cause/ideology... thus cannot be called for that cause... it gives less to the actual enemy... terrorist.
Click to expand...


who stated all acts of violence is terrorism i posted an actual definition of what terrorism is.
humans are complex creatures. sure we get the black and white mindless automaton but most are governed by all kinds of conflicting motives..and notions and ideas..does that translate into they cant or wont kill for their cause?
does it?
look its a post modern world, its useless now to really argue if a term meets a diffinition or if a man is a man or a terrorist is a terrorist or how many angels dance on a pin head.
those days are gone.
in today world anything it seems goes..
i am certain their will be plenty and even now are plenty of academics at the Sorbonne arguing if a terrorist si really a terrorist and so on so forth ad nausem as the bombs go...
that indeed is needed to an extant in ivory tower. out here it just muddies the waters...
im not here ot convince you this was a terroist act.
i think your a smart enough women to see it for what the hell it is.
im open to being proven wrong of course if it turns out to be a horrible accident or first shot of an alien invasion..or what ever..

Jezie said:
Yes... but is nuking actual terrorism or just war... I mean until we start fighting war using sock puppets all war is terrifying...
Click to expand...

is death camps actual terrosim or just war?
all war is terrifying
no doubt.

we did though well your nation and other did though sign agreements that had what are termed rule sof war..
why though?
all war is after all terrifying until we start flinging suck pockets..

believe it or not

how one wins does matter..

why even tolerate native reserves then?
the white man won
why not go kill and rape the rest?
war is war and is terrifying.
rules are for chumps.
gas em
why not stuff the bodies and sell them as products?
its limitless really once we toss out things like rules...

Jezie said:
you asked, I answered... you cannot cotton pick the response. :) Have I seen evidence of witch hunting .. yes. Lone girl writing evidently is plotting to take over the world through her terrorist writing of trying to figure out where to write a line.... the horror!
Click to expand...

so one incident form your life yesterday you will use as a prism to view the entire world
ok
good we are clear
moving on

Jezie said:
Possible, I do not recal who said what or where they were from ... I do know the Fox and a few others did... I was looking for ones that did not say Terrorist attack in France... was sadly hard... so yes, media was quite fast on calling it a terror attack even though, even at this time, we only have evidence of it being a mass killing.
Click to expand...

ok well when the gov finally decides to call it
you can come here and let us all know what it was
 
Last edited:
hoichi said:
no it can also be to influence gov policy or tit for tat violence against gov polices.
rarely does it ever actually change gov polices.




alright well i have an example of a guy who gets upset with pickles and ecided to go rape others where it counts with pickles...lots of big huge kosher pickles..(better in sign)

is this terrorism?
regardless its pickles... and its not the real world
why not keep our examples to the real world|?




who stated all acts of violence is terrorism i posted an actual definition of what terrorism is.
humans are complex creatures. sure we get the black and white mindless automaton but most are governed by all kinds of conflicting motives..and notions and ideas..does that translate into they cant or wont kill for their cause?
does it?
look its a post modern world, its useless now to really argue if a term meets a diffinition or if a man is a man or a terrorist is a terrorist or how many angels dance on a pin head.
those days are gone.
in today world anything it seems goes..
i am certain their will be plenty and even now are plenty of academics at the Sorbonne arguing if a terrorist si really a terrorist and so on so forth ad nausem as the bombs go...
that indeed is needed to an extant in ivory tower. out here it just muddies the waters...
im not here ot convince you this was a terroist act.
i think your a smart enough women to see it for what the hell it is.
im open to being proven wrong of course if it turns out to be a horrible accident or first shot of an alien invasion..or what ever..



is death camps actual terrosim or just war?
all war is terrifying
no doubt.

we did though well your nation and other did though sign agreements that had what are termed rule sof war..
why though?
all war is after all terrifying until we start flinging suck pockets..

believe it or not

how one wins does matter..

why even tolerate native reserves then?
the white man won
why not go kill and rape the rest?
war is war and is terrifying.
rules are for chumps.
gas em
why not stuff the bodies and sell them as products?
its limitless really once we toss out things like rules...



so one incident form your life yesterday you will use as a prism to view the entire world
ok
good we are clear
moving on



ok well when the gov finally decides to call it
you can come here and let us all know what it was
Click to expand...
I am by no means saying this is not a terrorist attack... but what I am saying is that media and society should find out first before naming it one. Real life exames... man robs gas station, man kills another man in a drug dealer gone wrong, media flinging the word terrorism, terrorist, terror, and other hot button words around increasing society's fear of terrorism until they see it everywhere and for everything. Until a lone girl happens to sit and write innocently gets attacked for writing...
 
Foxrac said:
You are getting entire of thread to be locked up, that's not cool.
Click to expand...

I agree that maybe obamas name should not have been mentioned because it does lock a lot of threads, but I don't think that was her intention.
 
Over 200 injured, with 25 on life support; the number of deaths could go up. :(
 
Last edited:
indeed we can discuss international po-....events with out mentioning or discussing pol---that drives them

i once had a discussion about ww2 without ever mentioning the poli- behind it
it was a thought experiment in university poli-science class

when we got to the holocaust it was very difficult to discuss that event, with out ever mentioning the naz- or je- or commi-and stuff like that...

so we ended up using color codes to stay within the rules of discussion ie no politics.

broken up in groups then later back to the discussion at hand..

the weird thing was the naz- actually used color codes themselves for those they murdered and all that, which made the discussion easier we thought in the color framework, you know, red, yellow, blue, green ect ect, pink... so on so forth..

so we could discuss shifting millions of yellows to that gas chamber or thousands of reds to that ditch so on ect ect, hanging all those pinks in that forest that kind of thing..
.
the prof of course got all upset, although we were in the rules we didn't have the spirit of the game ie no poli- talk...

so we started again this time discussing what was actually important, for that cataclysmic conflict which costs the lives of over 300 million people. hitlers std, or what he had breakfast that day ect etc, de gauls hair cut, Mussolini love for cinema.....so on, chuchils weird sexual practices with his pet pooch, the Canadian prime ministers seances in the house of common to contact his dead mother... that kind of thing...all the reasons why men will cause the deaths of over 300 million people...

that class was on
censorship

it was a thought experiement on how censorship easily controls thought process in a given population ie a university class..and then we were asked to enlarge the population to see if we could think about and discuss how it would work in a city scale, then to a nation...
and how thoughts would change....accordingly..

try it, it actually can be fun...
with people you know...
it can be done with anything, but using ww2 is good because the lines of demarcations are rather stark. so its actually easier to play the game..and ww2 offers a bunch of rather odd fellows to discuss.

once you remove the poli- away from hitler. you end up with a weird dude that couldn't much hurt a fly...who screwed his first cousin.
churchils just some fat ass that never surrendered a donought or a muffin by the looks of him
mousolini was funny as hell. almost charlie chaplin like..once you couldn't discuss anything about him besides his escapades and taste in fine wine...
stalin couldn't tell or take a joke, and really we kept him out of it...
ect ect..

try it
its fun

you end up by the actual act of mental censorship looking at monsters in a whole new way








..
 
Isis claims responsibility for Nice attack
The Local/AFP · 16 Jul 2016, 13:37

According to French media, the Islamic State (Isis) terrorist organisation has claimed responsibility for Thursday's Bastille Day attack which killed 84 people in Nice.

The Islamic State (Isis) group claimed responsibility for the truck attack that killed 84 people in Nice on France's national holiday, a news service affiliated with the jihadists said Saturday.

Amaq quoted an Isis security source as saying one of its "soldiers" carried out Thursday's carnage "in response to calls to target nations of coalition states that are fighting (Isis)".

A statement from Isis's official radio bulletin Al-Bayan said the attacker had carried out a "new, special operation using a truck".

Al-Bayan warned that Western countries "will not be spared from the blows of the mujahideen" no matter how much they increase their security measures.

For several years, extremist groups such as Isis and Al-Qaeda have exhorted followers to strike "infidels" -- singling out France on several occasions -- using whatever means they have to hand.

In September 2014, Isis spokesman Abu Mohammed al-Adnani, suggested supporters "run (infidels) over with your car".

While some attacks on the West -- such as the November assault on Paris and the March bombings in Brussels -- were carried out by jihadists who have been to the centre of IS operations in Iraq and Syria, others have been led by so-called "lone-wolf" attackers.

Lahouaiej-Bouhlel's father said he had suffered from depression and had "no links" to religion.

"From 2002 to 2004, he had problems that caused a nervous breakdown. He would become angry and he shouted... he would break anything he saw in front of him," Mohamed Mondher Lahouaiej-Bouhlel said in Tunisia.

Neighbours described the attacker, who worked as a delivery man, as a loner who never responded to their greetings.

He and his wife had three children, but she had demanded a divorce after a "violent argument", one neighbour said.

Meanwhile, according to legal sources, four men believed to be linked to the Tunisian man who killed 84 people when he drove a truck into a Bastille Day crowd in Nice were arrested overnight Saturday, a judicial source said.

One of the men being held was arrested Friday and three others on Saturday morning, the source added. The driver's estranged wife is also still being held by police.

Isis claims responsibility for Nice attack
The Local/AFP · 16 Jul 2016, 13:37



According to French media, the Islamic State (Isis) terrorist organisation has claimed responsibility for Thursday's Bastille Day attack which killed 84 people in Nice.

The Islamic State (Isis) group claimed responsibility for the truck attack that killed 84 people in Nice on France's national holiday, a news service affiliated with the jihadists said Saturday.

Amaq quoted an Isis security source as saying one of its "soldiers" carried out Thursday's carnage "in response to calls to target nations of coalition states that are fighting (Isis)".

A statement from Isis's official radio bulletin Al-Bayan said the attacker had carried out a "new, special operation using a truck".

Al-Bayan warned that Western countries "will not be spared from the blows of the mujahideen" no matter how much they increase their security measures.

For several years, extremist groups such as Isis and Al-Qaeda have exhorted followers to strike "infidels" -- singling out France on several occasions -- using whatever means they have to hand.

In September 2014, Isis spokesman Abu Mohammed al-Adnani, suggested supporters "run (infidels) over with your car".

While some attacks on the West -- such as the November assault on Paris and the March bombings in Brussels -- were carried out by jihadists who have been to the centre of IS operations in Iraq and Syria, others have been led by so-called "lone-wolf" attackers.

Lahouaiej-Bouhlel's father said he had suffered from depression and had "no links" to religion.

"From 2002 to 2004, he had problems that caused a nervous breakdown. He would become angry and he shouted... he would break anything he saw in front of him," Mohamed Mondher Lahouaiej-Bouhlel said in Tunisia.

Neighbours described the attacker, who worked as a delivery man, as a loner who never responded to their greetings.

He and his wife had three children, but she had demanded a divorce after a "violent argument", one neighbour said.

Meanwhile, according to legal sources, four men believed to be linked to the Tunisian man who killed 84 people when he drove a truck into a Bastille Day crowd in Nice were arrested overnight Saturday, a judicial source said.

One of the men being held was arrested Friday and three others on Saturday morning, the source added. The driver's estranged wife is also still being held by police.

More in link:
https://www.google.com/search?q=isi...d-metropcs-us&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8
 
Jezie said:
Time to ban trucks...
Click to expand...

Banning trucks won't stop it. If you ban trucks, they will go to pick ups , vans, mini vans or cars. It's doesn't matter what they are driving, if they are hell bent on killing people they will do it. There terrorist activities haven't worked yet, The President of France said they will step up their bombing of ISIS and al qaeda targets, so if the terrorist organizations think that their actions are going to get the governments to back down, I don't think they fully understand the resolve of the western world to these kind of acts. If I was in charge I would not leave one of them or their family members alive. If you do the ones you have killed will be replaced by one of the living family members. They all must die.
 
seb said:
Banning trucks won't stop it. If you ban trucks, they will go to pick ups , vans, mini vans or cars. It's doesn't matter what they are driving, if they are hell bent on killing people they will do it. There terrorist activities haven't worked yet, The President of France said they will step up their bombing of ISIS and al qaeda targets, so if the terrorist organizations think that their actions are going to get the governments to back down, I don't think they fully understand the resolve of the western world to these kind of acts. If I was in charge I would not leave one of them or their family members alive. If you do the ones you have killed will be replaced by one of the living family members. They all must die.
Click to expand...

haven't worked?
that depends on how "worked" is measured. they have managed to keep the capital of a first world nation in a state of emergency for the better part of a year, they have managed to enlarge that state of emergency for longer. they have spread terror. they have left casualties with minimal effort, in the heart of their enemies countries.
no one denies the above.
yes hollonde wagged his finger more..i get it..and thats a scary finger...
it really was

what resolve has the western world actually shown them?
(looks both ways)

but....
if you would slaughter innocents like them, ie peoples family members what the hell is the difference then?
slaughtering innocents is counter productive.

good thing your not in charge..
 
[QUOTE="seb, post: 2483187, member: 73799" I would not leave one of them or their family members alive. If you do the ones you have killed will be replaced by one of the living family members. They all must die.[/QUOTE]

Would leave you no better then them... you would kill more innocent lives... not one living family member? So children must be slaughtered in their mother's arms while babies are murdered in their crib?
Yeah... such extremism should be avoided and fear such as this is detrimental to any kind of free society
 
Jezie said:
[QUOTE="seb, post: 2483187, member: 73799" I would not leave one of them or their family members alive. If you do the ones you have killed will be replaced by one of the living family members. They all must die.
Click to expand...

Would leave you no better then them... you would kill more innocent lives... not one living family member? So children must be slaughtered in their mother's arms while babies are murdered in their crib?
Yeah... such extremism should be avoided and fear such as this is detrimental to any kind of free society[/QUOTE]


True, but that is the only way you will stop them. Osama Bin Ladens son has vowed revenge to the U.S. for killing his father, so the saga continues.
 
Last edited:
hoichi said:
haven't worked?
that depends on how "worked" is measured. they have managed to keep the capital of a first world nation in a state of emergency for the better part of a year, they have managed to enlarge that state of emergency for longer. they have spread terror. they have left casualties with minimal effort, in the heart of their enemies countries.
no one denies the above.
yes hollonde wagged his finger more..i get it..and thats a scary finger...
it really was

what resolve has the western world actually shown them?
(looks both ways)

but....
if you would slaughter innocents like them, ie peoples family members what the hell is the difference then?
slaughtering innocents is counter productive.

good thing your not in charge..
Click to expand...

It's true that they control parts of some countries, but their leadership is in a constant state of flux as we take out one after the other. They have said they want France to stop their bombing and all their actions have done is make France bomb them after each attack.

The west has been reluctant to send in ground troops and has relied on bombing and drone strikes to take out troops and the leadership of ISIS as well as al qaeda. Unfortunately they need to do a lot more to get the job done.

You aren't thinking like a muslim. One woman who had already lost some of her children to the action in afghanistan prior to 9/11 was interviewed after 9/11 and said she would gladly have more children to sacrifice them for the holy war, so unless you kill them all and break the chain of violence and hatred toward the west by eliminating them, you will just be fighting another generation of west hating jihadist. This isn't new to the islamic world they fought over centuries to spread Islam to other parts of the world and throughout history have been responsible for killing an estimated 270 million people through the years. So yes, we have to kill the one's who want to kill us. Unfortunately, you can't just kill the head of the snake you have to get the whole body or it will just keep coming after you.
 
seb said:
It's true that they control parts of some countries, but their leadership is in a constant state of flux as we take out one after the other.
Click to expand...

i was referring to them having paris in a state of emergency for over a year and this latest act has expanded that emergency .....terrorism is to spread terror. they have been doing that. as for taking out their leadership, that also was the policy against the veit gong an dnva...it didnt work , and that was done int he real ont he groudn, doign by 15000 feet hasnt proved too affective..
judgign by the stacks of bodies th elast year in france anyway.



seb said:
They have said they want France to stop their bombing and all their actions have done is make France bomb them after each attack.
Click to expand...
theyve alos stated allot more then that havnt they?

seb said:
The west has been reluctant to send in ground troops and has relied on bombing and drone strikes to take out troops and the leadership of ISIS as well as al qaeda. Unfortunately they need to do a lot more to get the job done.
Click to expand...

why do you believe air striks will even get the job done...


seb said:
You aren't thinking like a muslim.
Click to expand...

of course not im a buddhsit


seb said:
One woman who had already lost some of her children to the action in afghanistan prior to 9/11 was interviewed after 9/11 and said she would gladly have more children to sacrifice them for the holy war, so unless you kill them all and break the chain of violence and hatred toward the west by eliminating them, you will just be fighting another generation of west hating jihadist. This isn't new to the islamic world they fought over centuries to spread Islam to other parts of the world and throughout history have been responsible for killing an estimated 270 million people through the years. So yes, we have to kill the one's who want to kill us. Unfortunately, you can't just kill the head of the snake you have to get the whole body or it will just keep coming after you.
Click to expand...

well kill them all, as in every muslem, is just calling for genocide, considering they have nations with nukes pls do tell how will you do this?
i think we as a civilization can come with other options besides bringing back the gas chambers..
 
Jezie said:
seb said:
Would leave you no better then them... you would kill more innocent lives... not one living family member? So children must be slaughtered in their mother's arms while babies are murdered in their crib?
Yeah... such extremism should be avoided and fear such as this is detrimental to any kind of free society
Click to expand...
True, but that is the only way you will stop them. Osama Bin Ladens son has vowed revenge to the U.S. for killing his father, so the story continues.
Click to expand...

Please could y'all fix the broken quotes to avoid the confusion and I enjoy to read your discussion.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top