Radical secularists (including some on this very forum) have no concern for innocent victims of terrorist attacks. All they care about is to make sure that traditional religiosity get totally discredited, in this case with the example of Islam. They are concerned with relating these attacks with traditional Islam, it seems convenient to them.
I can safely say that because the killing of innocent people in other contexts does not affect them. Take the Gaza bombing by Israel in summer 2014! Many of them would rather legitimize those actions. Others (in particular some posters on this forum) pretended to be shocked by the Israeli violence but would later lick Netanyahu’s a*se when he orchestrated a demonstration in memory of the Charlie Hebdo victims. Take all of the attacks perpetrated by far-left or far-right movements in the seventies and eighties: the Brigate Rosse, the Rote Armee Fraktion, Action directe, Ordine Nuovo, etc. All secularists, all Islamophobic! 362 dead in Italy during these “Years of Lead”. Piazza Fontana 1969, Brescia 1974. Bologna Station 1980. Oktoberfest, Munich 1980. Typically Left-wing secularists would at least trivialize such actions while “right-wing” secularists would trivialize the massacre by Freemason Breivik. And I almost forgot about the nice and cool “freedom fighters” of Algeria, the FLN, the Milk-Bar Attack in Algiers 1956 – 4 dead and 52 wounded, some remained disabled for life. They are heroes to leftists today. But of course fighting for a nation is cooler, hyper than supposedly for Allah.
But most of all, none of these secularists showed any concern for let’s say
the NATO bombing of Sorman, Lybia (65km West of Tripoli) on June 20 2011, killing several children and their mothers, all in the name of “democracy” and “human rights”. Were these children’s lives less valuable than those in Nice? Just because they were Brownies or just because they had been raised in Islamic culture making them “potiential terrorists”?
Many among you will vote for Hillary Clinton, I guess or support her if you are not American. But that will make you an accomplice of War Crime and War against Humanity. Assume it!
Last time I referred to that fact the only response that posters could give to me is that their lives mattered less because they were war casualties, first as if France and Belgium were not at war at the moment, second France, Belgium, the USA, etc not only are at war at the moment but they also STARTED it and third even if those nations are at war, wars have had their rules since Middle Ages.
I don’t approve of vengeance but it’s also a natural feeling. When you create blood baths, in Lybia, in Iraq, in Kosovo, in Mali, in Syria, in Palestine, in Egypt, in Afghanistan, in Vietnam, in Hiroshima, etc you seriously believe that the survivors over there will never be out for revenge !!! Seriously! So before you accuse them, take a look at yourselves.
Just realise that great Amerindian chiefs such as Pontiac or Geronimo were considered terrorists by their contemporaries.
This Western suprematism never stops making me feel like puking. We have the best culture, our moral is superior and we have every right because we legalise drugs, we have gay marriage, “gay pride”, we have McDonald’s and Burger King’s, we are massively slaughtering animals and that’s why we promote veganism throughout the world claiming that Halal food is immoral. We promote immigration to show how tolerant we are until we realise that Muslim women are wearing veils just like our Catholic great-grandmothers or grandmothers used to. We have Play Stations, Coca-Cola, Red Bull, Justin Bieber or Disneyland. We censor dissidents for supposed anti-Semitism or so-called terrorism apologies, all in the name of freedom of speech, or now Islamic book shops like one here in Brussels which I am a customer of: “Ar-rissala”.
What do I see on this thread? First Muslims are incapable of understanding Western imperialism as an economic issue unlike Latin Americans and they have no plans to get people out of “poverty”. First of all, Western imperialism IS more than just an economic dominance, Westerners want to impose their own way of life and that imposes getting rid of the last religion which has massively remained traditional: Islam. How can Coca-Cola sell when Islam rightly says Coke is bad for you? How can Nintendo sell when Islam equally rightly says video games is bad for you? As a matter of fact in those lands people still consume US crap because Islam is declining but not as much as Christianism is in the West.
Already in the 1970’s intellectuals such as Pier Paolo Pasolini or Michel Clouscard came to realize that the new hedonistic way of life born out of the revolts of the sixties – mods & rockers – was beneficial for the establishment since it has opened up some new markets for companies in the entertainment business which they never could possibly have accessed to in the former traditional society. The Left-wing rebels of the sixties were the useful idiots of capitalism.
Then Latin America noticed Western Imperialism was strictly economic. That’s why Chavez constantly referred to Christianity in all his speeches, he banned any Halloween celebrations. Correa does not wish to hear anything about the “gender theory”. Actually, Latin America has remained deeply Catholic. Marxism has an alternative has failed in Latin America. The big problem with Chavez is that he still referred to Marxism, that’s why he also failed. A few months ago, I watched Simon Reeves’ show on the Yangze Kiang in China and he noticed that Chinese people were getting more and more religious because NEITHER the old Communist regime NOR the new capitalist system were satisfactory. And finally, if you don’t think radical Islam has social plans to fight against misery (I use the word “misery” because “poverty” is a positive word to me), then you evidently know crap about the richness of the millennium-old Islamic civilization. You’ve never heard of Emir Abdelkader of Algeria or King Muhammad V of Morocco and of course have never read the Koran.
Then you have the Estrosi crap. Everybody seems to trust a guy who claimed right after the Charlie Hebdo attacks that the Kouachi brothers would not have crossed
three crossroads in Nice because they have 199 cameras, one for 343 residents while there’s one for 1532 in Paris. And then he cannot explain how a lorry could have crossed the Prom’ on 2km at night on Bastille Day while even a car cannot cross that lane on Bastille Day !! And you all trust this guy? He’s a close friend of Sarkozy’s. Back in Summer 2014, he went to Israel and brought his support for the Gaza bombing on Israeli television sets. He also prohibited any show in Nice for comedian Dieudonné for ungrounded allegation of anti-Semitism as usual, in the name of freedom of speech. Normally the Leftists should hate him but when things matter they always swear allegiance to whom they should. Scrapping events because of terrorist thread is part of this doctrine of fear. However you’ll never scrap other kind of events like crap music concerts at the Bataclan. For that matter, the cultural elite would rather encourage people to never lose their habits and not to be afraid because the cultural elite needs the little men’s money. However small businesses such as small cycling races, you can scrap it whenever you want, it does not matter.
Finally, the headline of this thread already shows how the OP is using Mainstream Media words. It has stricken me for about 10 years how our media would use the word “terror” more keenly than the word “terrorism” because it appeals even more to the audience’s sensitivity than the latter word. The aim is to make you all scared and to make you react on emotions because if you are high on emotions you no longer think. So “The War against Terror” sounds really well. Do I fear a terrorist attack? I don’t. If I get caught in one, that would be my destiny.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram