Brussels Airport Explosion

First topic message reminder :

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-35869254

Blooming eck

At American Airlines check in desk

10 feared dead and 30 injured so far.

Another explosion at a Metro station to add to the confusion, all Metro stations closed

Stormee wrote:

HoratioTarr wrote:

The world's a horrible place at times.   I wish we could just all get on.

NEVER EVER WILL.

Truth of the matter, whitiz and unwhitiz do not go together, FACT.

As long as you are being divisive, how about separating oldz from youtz—damn kids are playing too rough for us tender, seasoned matures.

Keep the kidz in pens.

Eilzel wrote:Tragic news, along with the numerous bombings in Turkey lately.

However, this does not mark the beginning of the end of Europe. First of all, Europe is a big place consisting of more than the handful of nations that have been hit with attacks over the last 15 years. Even among  those have been hit, only France has suffered more than one.

If this is the beginning of the end then just how long is this 'end' expected to last?

Agreed.  More important than size, Europe is a crossroads, and it has some of the most creative, productive minds in the west.

But it is a challenge.  Y'all do realize that this all is revenge for the torture, rapes and killings that all lead back to George Walker Bush and Iraq, don't you?  We told you this was coming.  We said we were creating a generation of anti-western terrorists by invading Iraq and having facilities like abu Ghraib prison.  We predicted it!  Now, here it is.

Bush, the puppet,started it.

Raggamuffin wrote:OK, so what happens if we don't interfere at all. We don't bomb countries to protect people, and we don't let them in here either. Would that be a solution?

Sure, George Orwell wrote about that in 1984. The world will be 5-6 police states, with diminished and muted economic activity, and continual war and war preparedness.

Original Quill wrote:

Eilzel wrote:Tragic news, along with the numerous bombings in Turkey lately.

However, this does not mark the beginning of the end of Europe. First of all, Europe is a big place consisting of more than the handful of nations that have been hit with attacks over the last 15 years. Even among  those have been hit, only France has suffered more than one.

If this is the beginning of the end then just how long is this 'end' expected to last?

Agreed.  More important than size, Europe is a crossroads, and it has some of the most creative, productive minds in the west.

But it is a challenge.  Y'all do realize that this all is revenge for the torture, rapes and killings that all lead back to George Walker Bush and Iraq, don't you?  We told you this was coming.  We said we were creating a generation of anti-western terrorists by invading Iraq and having facilities like abu Ghraib prison.  We predicted it!  Now, here it is.

Again the absurd belief which empowers the terrorist caused based off again this stemming from the belief what drives these extremists, is not their religious ideology, but supposed crimes committed in a conflict. Its about the worst apologist and inherently wrongs stance of which the Islamists rub their hands in wonder we have people in the west laying such blame. I mean for over two years over 500,000 million Syrians have been killed in a civil war and yet we have seen no real call to Jihad to fight ISIS. Where countless people are suffering under both Assad and ISIS, where is the mass of Muslims outraged out the rape of children, slavery, murder etc.
This leftist shambolic blame game, clearly falls apart, because it fails to understand the ideology of ISIS or Islam itself

I mean are people seriously suggesting that due to claims of rape, torture in a conflict, is the main reason why a Muslim will suddenly forgo his faith and join a group like ISIS knowing full well, they rape young girls, have sexual slaves, murder etc? Where the majority of the victims and conflicts are within Muslim majority areas? Clearly the ideology is the driving factor to have then a Muslim normalize such barbarity

Didge wrote: what drives these extremists, is...their religious ideology,

Mehhhh...you can only go so far with that one. Religious extremism is not the cause, but a convenient skate-borad on which they are hitching a ride.

These people are responding to real hurts...raped sisters, broken bones and murderous acts committed by men who are now drug store clerks. Yes, we--the normal people of the west--created this monster. It didn't start in a religious textbook.

Original Quill wrote:

Didge wrote: what drives these extremists, is...their religious ideology,

Mehhhh...you can only go so far with that one.  Religious extremism is not the cause, but a convenient skate-borad on which they are hitching a ride.

These people are responding to real hurts...raped sisters, broken bones and murderous acts committed by men who are now drug store clerks.  Yes, we--the normal people of the west--created this monster.  It didn't start in a religious textbook.

Oh yes it is the cause, as again how can a Muslim go from thinking its wrong to have sexual slaves, to raping young girls etc?
If not for the religious ideology?
This leftist lie has been repeated so often it does not hold up to any scrutiny

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:OK, so what happens if we don't interfere at all. We don't bomb countries to protect people, and we don't let them in here either. Would that be a solution?

Sure, George Orwell wrote about that in 1984.  The world will be 5-6 police states, with diminished and muted economic activity, and continual war and war preparedness.

That was a work of fiction Quill, and it's nothing to do with my question.

Didge wrote:I mean are people seriously suggesting that due to claims of rape, torture in a conflict, is the  main reason why a Muslim will suddenly forgo his faith and join a group like ISIS knowing full well, they rape young girls, have sexual slaves, murder etc? Where the majority of the victims and conflicts are within Muslim majority areas? Clearly the ideology is the driving factor to have then a Muslim normalize such barbarity

Precisely, and we created ISIS. It's simple, very-basic cause and effect. Remember, ISIL is merely the former al-Qaeda in Iraq.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Sure, George Orwell wrote about that in 1984.  The world will be 5-6 police states, with diminished and muted economic activity, and continual war and war preparedness.

That was a work of fiction Quill, and it's nothing to do with my question.

Right.  It only responds to a part of your quoted passage: "...and we don't let them in here either."  It's the kind of xenophobic protectionism that shuts down the world in the way that Orwell wrote about in 1984.

Original Quill wrote:

Didge wrote:I mean are people seriously suggesting that due to claims of rape, torture in a conflict, is the  main reason why a Muslim will suddenly forgo his faith and join a group like ISIS knowing full well, they rape young girls, have sexual slaves, murder etc? Where the majority of the victims and conflicts are within Muslim majority areas? Clearly the ideology is the driving factor to have then a Muslim normalize such barbarity

Precisely, and we created ISIS.  It's simple, very-basic cause and effect.  Remember, ISIL is merely the former al-Qaeda in Iraq.

Your views and understand are poor and simplistic where as seen you cannot answer my points, as what drives a Muslim to normalize some of the worst barbaric acts possible

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

That was a work of fiction Quill, and it's nothing to do with my question.

Right.  It only responds to a part of your quoted passage: "...and we don't let them in here either."  It's the kind of xenophobic protectionism that shuts down the world in the way that Orwell wrote about in 1984.

No, it doesn't. The point is that if we don't get involved in those countries in any way, including taking in people from them, there will be no excuse for them to carry out terrorist attacks here.

Didge wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Precisely, and we created ISIS.  It's simple, very-basic cause and effect.  Remember, ISIL is merely the former al-Qaeda in Iraq.

Your views and understand are poor and simplistic where as seen you cannot answer my points, as what drives a Muslim to normalize some of the worst barbaric acts possible

I've answered that question quite openly: What drives a terrorist is revenge for the sins we committed on them...after all, we were the original rapists, torturers, kidnappers and murderers. Tit-forTat, is the simplistic way they are thinking.

Original Quill wrote:

Didge wrote:


Your views and understand are poor and simplistic where as seen you cannot answer my points, as what drives a Muslim to normalize some of the worst barbaric acts possible

I've answered that question quite openly: What drives a terrorist is revenge for the sins we committed on them...after all, we were the original rapists, torturers, kidnappers and murderers.  Tit-forTat, is the simplistic way they are thinking.

Gibberish on every single level as why else do they also support slavery, having sex slaves etc?
You are making the poorest excuses for their ideology.
So again explain to how a Muslim one days thinks raping a child is wrong to then think its a privilege??

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Right.  It only responds to a part of your quoted passage: "...and we don't let them in here either."  It's the kind of xenophobic protectionism that shuts down the world in the way that Orwell wrote about in 1984.

No, it doesn't. The point is that if we don't get involved in those countries in any way, including taking in people from them, there will be no excuse for them to carry out terrorist attacks here.

What you are talking about is shutting down all international communication and commerce. This Internet, for example. Telephones. Shipping. All trade. The list goes on.

Didge wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

I've answered that question quite openly: What drives a terrorist is revenge for the sins we committed on them...after all, we were the original rapists, torturers, kidnappers and murderers.  Tit-forTat, is the simplistic way they are thinking.

Gibberish on every single level as why else do they also support slavery, having sex slaves etc?
You are making the poorest excuses for their ideology.
So again explain to how a Muslim one days thinks raping a child is wrong to then think its a privilege??

We taught them to hate us...in precisely those ways.  They're just thinking, tit-for-tat.

The fact that the acts are the same is evidence of the continuity between what we taught them, and what they now do.

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

No, it doesn't. The point is that if we don't get involved in those countries in any way, including taking in people from them, there will be no excuse for them to carry out terrorist attacks here.

What you are talking about is shutting down all international communication and commerce.  This Internet, for example.  Telephones.  Shipping.  All trade.  The list goes on.

No I'm not.

Original Quill wrote:

Didge wrote:

Gibberish on every single level as why else do they also support slavery, having sex slaves etc?
You are making the poorest excuses for their ideology.
So again explain to how a Muslim one days thinks raping a child is wrong to then think its a privilege??

We taught them to hate us...in precisely those ways.  They're just thinking, tit-for-tat.

Gibberish again.
So a Muslim born in the UK, who has been constantly fed a narrative of hate against the West, conspiracies, lies etc about the West. Watches as thousands upon thousands of Muslims are the victims of Islamic extremism. He has no connection what so ever to Iraq or Afghanistan other than he is a Muslim. Of which the faith teaches of all Muslims as a family. To the view that the allied help in Afghanistan to the Northern Alliance, which freed the nation of the Taliban. That you are so naive to think its do with the actual conflict? That he then carried out 7/7 because of perceived wrongs towards Muslims and you do not see fundementally that religion is the main link and cause?
Seriously,. its because they are fed off a narrative of hate based around an extreme Islamic ideology
I mean surely you can show me all the Christian suicide bombings in the Middle East, by persecuted Christians?

Donald Trump weighs in: shut down the borders and arm everyone in Europe. If people had guns they could have shot the terrorists in Paris.

We need to use torture, he argues.

So the extreme far right, not wanting them here....isn't that just "tot for tat"?

Didge wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

We taught them to hate us...in precisely those ways.  They're just thinking, tit-for-tat.

Gibberish again.
So a Muslim born in the UK, who has been constantly fed a narrative of hate against the West, conspiracies, lies etc about the West. Watches as thousands upon thousands of Muslims are the victims of Islamic extremism. He has no connection what so ever to Iraq or Afghanistan other than he is a Muslim. Of which the faith teaches of all Muslims as a family. To the view that the allied help in Afghanistan to the Northern Alliance, which freed the nation of the Taliban. That you are so naive to think its do with the actual conflict? That he then carried out 7/7 because of perceived wrongs towards Muslims and you do not see fundementally that religion is the main link and cause?
Seriously,. its because they are fed off a narrative of hate based around an extreme Islamic ideology
I mean surely you can show me all the Christian suicide bombings in the Middle East, by persecuted Christians?

Yep, that's the narrative we created. Feels a bit strange when it comes back to haunt you, doesn't it? We thought it would all stay in those little, mud huts in Mozel, where we were raping, kidnapping and torturing...but here it is on Main Street.

You sound like you're supporting it Quill, like you think "We deserve this"

Original Quill wrote:

Didge wrote:



Gibberish again.
So a Muslim born in the UK, who has been constantly fed a narrative of hate against the West, conspiracies, lies etc about the West. Watches as thousands upon thousands of Muslims are the victims of Islamic extremism. He has no connection what so ever to Iraq or Afghanistan other than he is a Muslim. Of which the faith teaches of all Muslims as a family. To the view that the allied help in Afghanistan to the Northern Alliance, which freed the nation of the Taliban. That you are so naive to think its do with the actual conflict? That he then carried out 7/7 because of perceived wrongs towards Muslims and you do not see fundementally that religion is the main link and cause?
Seriously,. its because they are fed off a narrative of hate based around an extreme Islamic ideology
I mean surely you can show me all the Christian suicide bombings in the Middle East, by persecuted Christians?

Yep, that's the narrative we created.  Feels a bit strange when it comes back to haunt you, doesn't it?  We thought it would all stay in those little, mud huts in Mozel, where we were raping, kidnapping and torturing...but here it is on Main Street.

Wrong, its the narrative created by the Islamist, that has continued throughout the centuries
Look I know you follow a really absurd pacifist ideology that would allow you to sit back and people die suffering.
Its a flawed philosophy

eddie wrote:So the extreme far right, not wanting them here....isn't that just "tot for tat"?

Yeah. That's the game we are in...each side upping the ante on the next round. Paris and Brussles makes San Bernardino look puny, doesn't it?

I think there are no wars where there's only one side to blame, that's obvious.

It's got to stop somewhere though.

eddie wrote:I think there are no wars where there's only one side to blame, that's obvious.

It's got to stop somewhere though.

Yes, that's why diplomacy was elevated to command-level status. Still, there are going to be some who seek easy, direct answers.

And it makes you consider how nefarious men like Dick Cheney are, who not only turned his back on diplomacy, but sought new ways to make a profit from the misery of people.

He sounds like Cameron.

Didge wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Yep, that's the narrative we created.  Feels a bit strange when it comes back to haunt you, doesn't it?  We thought it would all stay in those little, mud huts in Mozel, where we were raping, kidnapping and torturing...but here it is on Main Street.

Wrong, its the narrative created by the Islamist, that has continued throughout the centuries
Look I know you follow a really absurd pacifist ideology that would allow you to sit back and people die suffering.
Its a flawed philosophy

I'm not a pacifist.  I follow reason, not any particular policy...particularly if it doesn't fit the need.  

Take a look at the C-Span 2 clip of a speech Senator Robert Byrd made back in 2003, over in the Canada, Latin Americas/US News Section, under the thread on KKK support for Trump/Clinton...the clip of the speech posted by Ben.  It is a brilliant exposition of my position on Iraq and our troubles in the Middle East.  

All I am doing right now, is raising our consciousness of what are the truths and fruition of his cautionary speech back when he made it.  He predicted, after a long, expensive, purposeless war, we would be in the aftermath of it, cleaning up.  And where are we right now?

Cleaning up the Brussels Airport, of course.

I know ONE thing I would do...but you probably dont want to know

Lord Foul wrote:I know ONE thing I would do...but you probably dont want to know

Better to know, than not know. What's that?

poo himself.

all these "isis" types that we have discovered ...the ones being radicalised and those known ones "returning"

execute the lot....publicly

and apply that philosophy in future to any that are "researching" anything to do with them

Stormee wrote:poo himself.

yer ...right stormee....if you say so....

Lord Foul wrote:all these "isis" types that we have discovered ...the ones being radicalised and those known ones "returning"

execute the lot....publicly

and apply that philosophy in future to any that are "researching" anything to do with them

I think that was called the FINAL SOLUTION, by the Nazis circa 1940-1945. That's all right, I don't meant to stigmatize that solution. But it's been used before, and I don't think it really works.

You see, it's like the fallopian tubes. If even only little part remains patent, someone gets through. And, one thing leads to another, and you're right back where you started.

Nah, if you've got a sore that needs healing, better go ahead and heal it.

Original Quill wrote:

Didge wrote:


Wrong, its the narrative created by the Islamist, that has continued throughout the centuries
Look I know you follow a really absurd pacifist ideology that would allow you to sit back and people die suffering.
Its a flawed philosophy

I'm not a pacifist.  I follow reason, not any particular policy...particularly if it doesn't fit the need.  

Take a look at the C-Span 2 clip of a speech Senator Robert Byrd made back in 2003, over in the Canada, Latin Americas/US News Section, under the thread on KKK support for Trump/Clinton...the clip of the speech posted by Ben.  It is a brilliant exposition of my position on Iraq and our troubles in the Middle East.  

All I am doing right now, is raising our consciousness of what are the truths and fruition of his cautionary speech back when he made it.  He predicted, after a long, expensive, purposeless war, we would be in the aftermath of it, cleaning up.  And where are we right now?

Cleaning up the Brussels Airport, of course.

Reason, you failed throughout to discount every point I made
Again ISIS love people like yourself who fail to understand how they recruit and you further aid that by poor views not understanding their ideology or how they play off Islam and a narative of hate that has been around for centuries.
I mean seriously, do you think early Islam just had mass conversions over night, or the fact it was fundementally by taking up the sword, where the Qureyshi tribe were already employed as mercenary troops within the Byzantine army. What with an already weaken state it was in with years of war with the Sassanid Empire who were also weakened. Why do you think the Muslim armies won so quickly and with ease? Having a large part of your army already policing much of the Holy lands, who were turncoats, made for an easy victory. And groups like ISIS play off this Rhetoric, where even more they have played off what Muslim rulers have done for centuries a fear of western crusades.

This is more about religious supremacy and fear of Islam losing control itself to progression. Fear has driven Hardline Muslims, as it once did with Christianity in the west which also viewed religious control being supersceded by Secularism. Has it even not sunk in how much this has escaleted since and after the Arab Springs? Its a battle in the end they will lose when more and more Muslims themselves understand that they can have more freedoms, not restricted by those who's want to control via Islam. There is so much you have to learn. The Wahhabists were terrorists in the days of the Ottoman Empire, showing this hate goes back for a very long time

Didge wrote:Reason, you failed throughout to discount every point I made
Again ISIS love people like yourself who fail to understand how they recruit and you further aid that by poor views not understanding their ideology or how they play off Islam and a narative of hate that has been around for centuries.
I mean seriously, do you think early Islam just had mass conversions over night, or the fact it was fundementally by taking up the sword, where the Qureyshi tribe were already employed as mercenary troops within the Byzantine army. What with an already weaken state it was in with years of war with the Sassanid Empire who were also weakened. Why do you think the Muslim armies won so quickly and with ease? Having a large part of your army already policing much of the Holy lands, who were turncoats, made for an easy victory. And groups like ISIS play off this Rhetoric, where even more they have played off what Muslim rulers have done for centuries a fear of western crusades.

This is more about religious supremacy and fear of Islam losing control itself to progression. Fear has driven Hardline Muslims, as it once did with Christianity in the west which also viewed religious control being supersceded by Secularism. Has it even not sunk in how much this has escaleted since and after the Arab Springs? Its a battle in the end they will lose when more and more Muslims themselves understand that they can have more freedoms, not restricted by those who's want to control via Islam. There is so much you have to learn. The Wahhabists were terrorists in the days of the Ottoman Empire, showing this hate goes back for a very long time

I think you make one important point, relative to causes of this (and other) tragedy: "...the fear of Islam losing control itself to progression."  But, remember, you also say that ISIS is not Islam, but some aberration of Islam.  So they have already lost that control, have they not?

There are probably a lot of in-puts into this situation.  Some we can help; some we cannot.  But as to those where we are the in-put, is it not better to appreciate our own contribution to the problem?

You say talking about it is only fueling the ISIS apparatus.  So, the alternative is to not discuss it?  Isn't that like shutting down the airport so they can't do anymore damage?  You're just cutting off your nose to spite your face.  We can close down modern society to avoid the hurt, but that will hurt more.

You want to know what started terrorism?

Interesting.

Original Quill wrote:

Didge wrote:Reason, you failed throughout to discount every point I made
Again ISIS love people like yourself who fail to understand how they recruit and you further aid that by poor views not understanding their ideology or how they play off Islam and a narative of hate that has been around for centuries.
I mean seriously, do you think early Islam just had mass conversions over night, or the fact it was fundementally by taking up the sword, where the Qureyshi tribe were already employed as mercenary troops within the Byzantine army. What with an already weaken state it was in with years of war with the Sassanid Empire who were also weakened. Why do you think the Muslim armies won so quickly and with ease? Having a large part of your army already policing much of the Holy lands, who were turncoats, made for an easy victory. And groups like ISIS play off this Rhetoric, where even more they have played off what Muslim rulers have done for centuries a fear of western crusades.

This is more about religious supremacy and fear of Islam losing control itself to progression. Fear has driven Hardline Muslims, as it once did with Christianity in the west which also viewed religious control being supersceded by Secularism. Has it even not sunk in how much this has escaleted since and after the Arab Springs? Its a battle in the end they will lose when more and more Muslims themselves understand that they can have more freedoms, not restricted by those who's want to control via Islam. There is so much you have to learn. The Wahhabists were terrorists in the days of the Ottoman Empire, showing this hate goes back for a very long time

I think you make one important point, relative to causes of this (and other) tragedy: "...the fear of Islam losing control itself to progression."  But, remember, you also say that ISIS is not Islam, but some aberration of Islam.  So they have already lost that control, have they not?

There are probably a lot of in-puts into this situation.  Some we can help; some we cannot.  But as to those where we are the in-put, is it not better to appreciate our own contribution to the problem?

You say talking about it is only fueling the ISIS apparatus.  So, the alternative is to not discuss it?  Isn't that like shutting down the airport so they can't do anymore damage?  You're just cutting off your nose to spite your face.  We can close down modern society to avoid the hurt, but that will hurt more.

The point is Quill by playing into their narative of hate, you do then make ther cause that much easier.

I mean look at this realistically from the view point of WW2
Take the view being stated now, that intervention, should by the views made in regards of Muslims, have seen both Japan and Germany have after their total defeat, inserrection and terrorissm for years afterwards, but this is simple not the case and why? Both then worked with the allies even under occupation for years to become economically strong again. It takes something far more powerful, you can play off onto a people who are very much influenced by and that is Islam doctrine itself. It does not matter if the West shows the higher moral ground of doing the right thing. They will claim its in conflict with their Islamic law and that is seen as an absolute.
Even Ben's map has just erased years of terrorism within the Ottoman empire itself with the likes of Wahhabists and proves Ben also aids ISIS by his false narative. I gues ben has never heard of the Old Man of the mountain, the oroiginal assassins. I mean the events he posts happened nearly a centuri ago and by this we are talking about a grudge that Muslims seem incapable of getting over, so why is that? None of them alive today lived that? So how on earth can that even be the cause for resentment?

It has nothing to do with that. It is of course used extensively within the conspiraces and naratives of hate
It has though everything to do with Muslims fearing that their faith is wrong. We are talking about a mass of literal believersAs for centuries that held supreme power and no longer they do and this causes doubt in the deity you believe in, as Muslim armies have been resoundly beaten time and again since Napoleon first invaded Eygpt. I mean Germany made the same mistake after the First World War. It did not see its aggression was wrong and saw the rise of the most barbaric ideology in the Nazi's. It took a second conflict which saw what Von Cluawitz had spoken of, Absolute War, between the Soviets and the Nazi's.

Anyway.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alastair-crooke/isis-wahhabism-saudi-arabia_b_5717157.html

To help further educate Ben on where islamic terrorism first started.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isma'ilism

Didge wrote:It has though everything to do with Muslims fearing that their faith is wrong. We are talking about a mass of literal believersAs for centuries that held supreme power and no longer they do and this causes doubt in the deity you believe in, as Muslim armies have been resoundly beaten time and again since Napoleon first invaded Eygpt. I mean Germany made the same mistake after the First World War. It did not see its aggression was wrong and saw the rise of the most barbaric ideology in the Nazi's. It took a second conflict which saw what Von Cluawitz had spoken of, Absolute War, between the Soviets and the Nazi's.

That being the case, it sounds like you might have a plan.  If intervention and force is not the answer; and Islam is insecure about it’s own validity; is not the answer some sort of restatement of what Islam means?  Of course, it would have to come from within.  (One chapter in my book has to do with the three ‘I’s’ of peacemaking: internal, inclusive and incorporative.  If the stimulus doesn’t come from within, then there will be no subscription among the population.)

I mean, if the cause is an ideological disturbance in the force, then the force must somehow be bent.

Original Quill wrote:

Didge wrote:It has though everything to do with Muslims fearing that their faith is wrong. We are talking about a mass of literal believersAs for centuries that held supreme power and no longer they do and this causes doubt in the deity you believe in, as Muslim armies have been resoundly beaten time and again since Napoleon first invaded Eygpt. I mean Germany made the same mistake after the First World War. It did not see its aggression was wrong and saw the rise of the most barbaric ideology in the Nazi's. It took a second conflict which saw what Von Cluawitz had spoken of, Absolute War, between the Soviets and the Nazi's.

That being the case, it sounds like you might have a plan.  If intervention and force is not the answer; And Islam is insecure of it’s own validity; Is not the answer some sort of restatement of what Islam means?  Of course, it would have to come from within.  One chapter in my book has to do with the three ‘I’s’ of peacemaking: internal, inclusive and incorporative.  If the stimulus doesn’t come from within, then there will be no subscription among the population.

I mean, if the cause is an ideological disturbance in the force, then the force must somehow be bent.

Fear, is the biggest aspect played upon by ISIS in its recruitment drive.
Again, to understand ISIS, you need to first understand Wahhabism and how they cast Muslims that do not adhete to their doctrines as enemies and infidels.
The problem is so many people go so little back in time to see the birth of this organisation and how they have learnt so well off the terrorism first apllied by the minority Isma'il sect.
Just read their history, how they held such  control and power, with such a small armed group.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassins

From:
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/03/if-brussels-feared-a-terrorist-attack-why-was-its-airport-security-so-lax/

If Brussels feared a terrorist attack, why was its airport security so laX??

This morning, we woke up to the terrible news that two bombs had exploded in Brussels airport. Having been through it a few days ago, unfortunately I can’t say I’m surprised that this attack has happened in this particular airport.

When I arrived at Brussels airport on Sunday I expected to see a heavy police presence, especially given that Salah Abdeslam – the terror suspect who had been on the run since the Paris attacks – had been arrested two days previously in Brussels. Even then, the authorities had been warning of a retaliatory attack. And for good reason: a large number of weapons had also been found in raids in the Molenbeek district of the city earlier in the week, which may have suggested that another Paris style attack was imminent.

The bomb blasts that took place today appear to have happened within the check-in areas of the airport, which are pre-security checks, but in the circumstances you’d expect a police presence even there. I was astonished to find no police presence at all in the check-in area, no police sniffer dogs, not even the token armed police officer you often see patrolling airports.

I was flying from Brussels to Basel and after scanning my boarding pass to enter the security area there were not even any passport checks in place. I assume this is because of Schengen*, but it didn’t exactly fill me with confidence. I then headed to the queue for the security screening where again there was a distinct lack of security. The woman ahead of me in the line refused to remove her liquids from her hand luggage. Rather than argue with her, the security guard waved the woman through. Not what you would expect from a country that is supposedly on high alert for a terrorist attack.

Sophie Ryan is a staff member at The Spectator.

* If this French journalist is to be believed, the security at the airport was lax even by local standards.

Didge wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

That being the case, it sounds like you might have a plan.  If intervention and force is not the answer; And Islam is insecure of it’s own validity; Is not the answer some sort of restatement of what Islam means?  Of course, it would have to come from within.  One chapter in my book has to do with the three ‘I’s’ of peacemaking: internal, inclusive and incorporative.  If the stimulus doesn’t come from within, then there will be no subscription among the population.

I mean, if the cause is an ideological disturbance in the force, then the force must somehow be bent.

Fear, is the biggest aspect played upon by ISIS in its recruitment drive.
Again, to understand ISIS, you need to first understand Wahhabism and how they cast Muslims that do not adhete to their doctrines as enemies and infidels.
The problem is so many people go so little back in time to see the birth of this organisation and how they have learnt so well off the terrorism first apllied by the minority Isma'il sect.
Just read their history, how they held such  control and power, with such a small armed group.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassins

I think we all agree that fear is the essential ingredient in terrorism. Fear is on the tactical level, however. If the causes are ideological, wouldn't the answer have to lie in the strategy? I think ideological travail must be met with ideological answers.

'Nothing to do with islam, not all Muslims, tiny minority, islamophobia is the real problem' - there, think that's all the leftie bases covered.

Lord Foul wrote:all these "isis" types that we have discovered ...the ones being radicalised and those known ones "returning"

execute the lot....publicly

and apply that philosophy in future to any that are "researching" anything to do with them

Now there's a coincidence LF. When we saw the news about Brussels I said to my wife if the culprits are caught alive, then hang them in public, in the town square.

The Puzzler wrote:'Nothing to do with islam, not all Muslims, tiny minority, islamophobia is the real problem' - there, think that's all the leftie bases covered.

Thank you Puzz...we'll keep your ideas in mind.

eddie wrote:From:
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/03/if-brussels-feared-a-terrorist-attack-why-was-its-airport-security-so-lax/

If Brussels feared a terrorist attack, why was its airport security so laX??

This morning, we woke up to the terrible news that two bombs had exploded in Brussels airport. Having been through it a few days ago, unfortunately I can’t say I’m surprised that this attack has happened in this particular airport.

When I arrived at Brussels airport on Sunday I expected to see a heavy police presence, especially given that Salah Abdeslam – the terror suspect who had been on the run since the Paris attacks – had been arrested two days previously in Brussels. Even then, the authorities had been warning of a retaliatory attack. And for good reason: a large number of weapons had also been found in raids in the Molenbeek district of the city earlier in the week, which may have suggested that another Paris style attack was imminent.

The bomb blasts that took place today appear to have happened within the check-in areas of the airport, which are pre-security checks, but in the circumstances you’d expect a police presence even there. I was astonished to find no police presence at all in the check-in area, no police sniffer dogs, not even the token armed police officer you often see patrolling airports.

I was flying from Brussels to Basel and after scanning my boarding pass to enter the security area there were not even any passport checks in place. I assume this is because of Schengen*, but it didn’t exactly fill me with confidence. I then headed to the queue for the security screening where again there was a distinct lack of security. The woman ahead of me in the line refused to remove her liquids from her hand luggage. Rather than argue with her, the security guard waved the woman through. Not what you would expect from a country that is supposedly on high alert for a terrorist attack.

Sophie Ryan is a staff member at The Spectator.

* If this French journalist is to be believed, the security at the airport was lax even by local standards.

Agree
there seems to be an overabundance of incompetence considering they just announced they might have capture a suspect that could expose terrorist plans... which obviously forces the position on the terrorist to either bring the plans forward or abandon them

Belgium went for two years virtually without a national government, so it is no surprise that it now turns out to be lax in its security provisions.

That's why Belgium is the home base of these guys.