Jump to content

Home

Norway terrorist attacks


jrrtoken
 Share

Recommended Posts

Well, if we define the hundreds of government officials and civilians that have been systematically murdered by Mexican drug cartels in the past two years as "drug-related violence", then I guess that does that does narrow the playing field to AQ as prime terrorist #1. :giveup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That source does not help your case. 20%? The majority of which are in places like Afghanistan where AQ is more able to operate? That renders the presumptions made about the Norway attacks more, not less, ludicrous.

 

Not sure we're on the same page in arguments here, Salzella. The argument that I'm generally making here, specifically with MK, is that Muslim terrorists are the worse of the worse in terrorism acts of killing people; and that they shouldn't be given less attention then what they deserve. Where as, he believes they are not such a large threat to the world and we shouldn't waste most of our attention and resources on them, because there are just as many non-muslim terrorist threats to "protect" ourselves against. That is the reason why I provided that specific source, they are the biggest threat to the world right now.

 

 

 

 

 

 

To quote the article: "During this time, al Qa'ida was responsible for less than 1% of all terrorist attacks." It goes on to indicate that AQ caused more casualties than other group, so I understand your point. Any terror attack is dangerous, some more so than others.

 

Right. That's mainly the point I'm making here. In general, as well as AQ, Muslim terrorists have caused more deaths of human life across the globe versus non-Muslim terrorist. Yet, your saying Muslim terrorist are no more dangerous than non-Muslim terrorist. Sorry, but I have to disagree, the number of deaths they caused in such a short period of time prove otherwise.

 

 

 

However, this source covers exclusively attacks by AQ and it's allies, and doesn't go into detail about non-Muslim attacks.

 

What specific details are you looking for, about non-Muslim attacks? How many people they've killed? Whether they have connections with Muslim extremists? Please clarify.

 

 

 

As far as the attention received by Muslim extremists goes, of course they receive more when the media puts their name out first.

 

Well yes, they do receive the most media attention, but when they're advertising threats and claiming responsbility for terroristic attacks across the globe on the local news media, which they know will reach everybody on national news level worldwide, it doesn't help their case very much does it? They will always be suspect number one, their names will be out there first. Of course that's what the Islamic extremists want, they want there names to be continuously mentioned for all the world to see and hear, so that they can get the most attention. The media just plays along for their own benifit.

 

 

 

There are many reasons for AQ's relative success in implementing attacks. Religious dogma only brings in recruits, it doesn't make them more or less dangerous than any other terrorist. Training, funding, and zealotry are a dangerous combination.

 

Religious dogma alone doesn't kill anybody with words, religious extremist can preach death to all until the sun expoldes as long as they are not carrying out those acts of terroristic murder upon thousands.

 

 

However, Islam does not have a monopoly on any of those.

 

Well I've not seen or heard Muslim terrorists have connections with non-muslim terrorists, like the McVeighs and Breiviks of the world or any others for that matter, if that's what your implying here. At least I never seen any evidence of it.

 

 

 

I am enjoying this debate, the source material was particularly enlightening. I look forward to your rebuttal. :D

 

Well I'm glad it enlighten you in some way, we are always learning something new. ;)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Well, if we define the hundreds of government officials and civilians that have been systematically murdered by Mexican drug cartels in the past two years as "drug-related violence", then I guess that does that does narrow the playing field to AQ as prime terrorist #1. :giveup:

 

Well if the drug cartels start elimnating U.S. law officers on mass scale, then any Muslim terrorist group won't be "prime terrorist #1" as far as the U.S. is concerned. Of course Mexican officals don't won't the U.S. to label the Cartel as terrorists organizations and intervene in their drug war, as they call it, so I wonder what kind of problems between the U.S. and Mexico it will cause.

Edited by purifier
spelling, again!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I heard they were going to alter the constitution to increase his sentence.
Nope. As was said earlier, we're not changing laws to punish one individual, and any law/Constitution change would probably come too late to affect Breivik anyway. Either way, punishment was never what the Norwegian justice system was all about.

 

What it boils down to is that the 21 year limit for offenses has been in placefor an eternity. It's not like our Constitution and laws were written while the attacks were taking place.

 

If you want laws changed to punish a terrorist attack more severely, then that's something you have to campaign for and implement before the attack occurs, not in the following days and weeks. A Norwegian saying about about shutting the door to the stable after the horses have ran off comes to mind:raise:.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no problem with 21 years, assuming the perpetrator is considered safe to release back into society (which in the case of mass murder is unlikely to happen before he/she reaches pension age). A longer sentence won't really discourage anyone, and if they are safe to release back into society, I have no wish to torment the perpetrator. A longer prison sentence is not even shutting the door after the horses have ran off, it's tormenting the fled horses and making it ilegal to put them to good use after the have been tamed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There may still be other horses in the stable that would run off, my friend.
Sure, and if you want the laws to be made harsher in anticipation of their deeds, go right ahead. I'm talking about the one of Utøya infamy.

 

Either way, as was just said, the Norwegian justice system aren't about punishment or retaliation, but about rehabilitation and the safe-keeping of dangerous individuals (such as murderers, rapists, and, of course, terrorists) so that their victims don't have to live in fear of running into them on the street. We're not like certain other countries that subject people to long sentences in deplorable conditions or kill them outright to make other people feel good, the victims will have to get their therapy elsewhere.

 

In the case of Breivik, though, it's far from a given that he'll be let out on the streets in 21 years. He's a very special case to say the least, and it's a bit of a "wait and see" situation right now. Far from unlikely that he'll be in for life, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Breivik has been declared mentally unfit for prison and will most likely end up in forced mental care. While the courts can still sentence him to prison, they rarely do, so. Also there is a chance that quality control group will find fault with the diagnosis, but again, it usually doesn't happen. He can be held there technically indefinitely, or just for some years, depends on his mental state.

For those who think he'll get off easy, consider this, he saw himself as basically a savior of the west, a man who took the necessary hard choices, killing some to save the rest. A martyr, soldier and hero in his head, now declared to be suffering from paranoid schizophrenia.

I can hardly think of a worse punishment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont think there are any worse in his case. Think of it like this: If he was sentenced to death, he would become a martyr for his case, not to mention that its an easy way out, and if he was sentenced to a life in prison he could just turn that around and make up propaganda about the government treating him unfairly. An insane mind has weird ways of seeing things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I say there be a three-way battle royale on a Norwegian island: Varg Vikernes and his Pagans vs. Breivik and his Christian Neo-Knights Templar vs. any Islamic Terrorist cells present in Norway. Referees are Swedish death metallers, Iranian clerics and Israeli foreign ministry officials.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Referees are Swedish death metallers.....

 

 

 

Right! Okay then how about...DEATHLOK!

picture.php?albumid=434&pictureid=8897

 

 

Only one guy in this band is from Sweden though, but we can cut corners can't we? Cause they're like super bad(a person's derriere) man, even though you can't understand a freak'in word they're singing. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...