Thread Oslo Bombing

ZRH said:
There have never been many terrorist attacks in the US. That is why 9/11 was shocking at the time, it was the first major terrorist attack on american soil ever.
Click to expand...

Oklahoma City says 'No, you don't know what you are talking about'.

The victims of the FIRST WTC bombing also say 'Shut the fuck up'
 
Last edited:
I think pretty much every news source I saw the other day jumped to conclusions that al queda was responsible for these attacks. Also, every news source I've seen since they discovered the culprit has corrected themselves. The major news networks here are still calling it a terrorist attack and there's been debate based on Norwegian law as to how this crazy whack-o will be prosecuted. It's not up to us at this point.
 
Duke said:
Oklahoma City says 'No, you don't know what you are talking about'.

The victims of the FIRST WTC bombing also say 'Shut the fuck up'
Click to expand...
Oh Pan Am flight 103 (270 dead)
LaGuardia Airport Christmas Bomb (11 dead 75 wounded)
Jewish Defense League - 15 terrorist attacks in 20 years
Fuerzas Armadas de Liberacion Nacional - 40 terrorist attacks in the 1970s

168 people died in OK City.
6 people died in the 1993 WTC attack.

I know what I didn't include. 2752 in one attack makes it the first major terrorist attack on US soil by scale.
 
I still don't understand why anyone would want to kill Norwegians. they are like "the silly uncle who everyone let's baby sit" of Europe.

Hell I've never been there are for the life of me I could not think of one asshole from Norway. german..sure, amercia bunches, britian...gross nation product
 
they're too effete and smug to venture past their own borders. they kicked sarcasmo out for swearing in english once when he was a kid
 
Onnotangu said:
Hell I've never been there are for the life of me I could not think of one asshole from Norway. german..sure, amercia bunches, britian...gross nation product
Click to expand...
Quisling much? Only Norway has a personage synonymous with 'traitor'

Arnfinn Nesset murdered 22? people, only got 20 years in prison (the max there).

Not to mention the one that should be obvious to you, Varg Vikernes. 50 arsons and one murder >.>
 
ZRH said:
There have never been many terrorist attacks in the US. That is why 9/11 was shocking at the time, it was the first major terrorist attack on american soil ever.

Ok statistics on mainland US 2004-2011. 18 total attacks with victims, 5 by islamic groups/affiliations that's 27%, 3 by environmental groups 16.6%, 1 by neonazi/white supremacists 5.55%, 1 by anarchists 5.55%, 3 by "unknown family member" 16.66%. Out of 74 total casualties, 56 were by islamic groups/affiliates, which is 75.67%.

I'm a little surprised actually. Never heard about any environmentalist attacks.

I included christian terrorist attacks IN THE PART YOU QUOTED and white supremacists. If you blow up an abortion clinic, you're a terrorist. If you plot to overthrow the US government and live in trailers in the middle of nowhere and refuse to pay taxes and blow stuff stuff up, you're a terrorist. The white supremacists are I'm guessing mostly christian.

If you belong you're brown, islamic, strap a bomb to yourself and run into a restaurant yelling "Allahu Akbar." YOU ARE PROBABLY A TERRORIST.

You think you are putting forth a unique perspective by not judging. It's not a bad thing. But in this discussion you are just denying reality. The vast majority of terrorism is perpetuated by Islamic groups because it's culturally acceptable and they generally lack the funds to wage conventional warfare. 50-100 years ago, I would've said communist rebels, because at the time they were in the same position. 160 years ago I would've said American-Indians.
Click to expand...

Yes your facts and the presentation of them are very eloquent. They fail to recognise what they're replying to though, namely that if you're brown you're a terrorist and if you're white you're just a nutjob. You can't really counter than with facts.
 
Knee-moe said:
Yes your facts and the presentation of them are very eloquent. They fail to recognise what they're replying to though, namely that if you're brown you're a terrorist and if you're white you're just a nutjob. You can't really counter than with facts.
Click to expand...
Thank you. Government websites are so slow it took forever to look up :p Even if you refuse to acknowledge the multiple examples of white terrorism I posted about. Serial killers aren't terrorists, the organized crime isn't terrorism, you can agree to that. There's no definitive definition of terrorism, but it usually implies ideological goals, illegal warfare, and publicly targeting non-combatants, usually by organized groups. Asymmetric warfare is usually 'terrorism.' Al Qaeda is terrorists, the IRA is terrorists, actually come to think of it, most terrorism against the British is from Jews and the Irish. One postal worker who finally snaps at work, is not a terrorist.
 
ZRH said:
Thank you. Government websites are so slow it took forever to look up :p Even if you refuse to acknowledge the multiple examples of white terrorism I posted about. Serial killers aren't terrorists, the organized crime isn't terrorism, you can agree to that. There's no definitive definition of terrorism, but it usually implies ideological goals, illegal warfare, and publicly targeting non-combatants, usually by organized groups. Asymmetric warfare is usually 'terrorism.' Al Qaeda is terrorists, the IRA is terrorists, actually come to think of it, most terrorism against the British is from Jews and the Irish. One postal worker who finally snaps at work, is not a terrorist.
Click to expand...

Political ideology, the unabomber, this norwegian guy. Killing for political purpose = terrorism.
 
Knee-moe said:
Political ideology, the unabomber, this norwegian guy. Killing for political purpose = terrorism.
Click to expand...
So anyone who was ever executed for treason = terrorism. Assassination, by definition then, would be terrorism. Except those aren't terrorism, because they rarely involve either a desire to create fear (it's called terror-ism after all) and they don't involve indiscriminate targeting of non combatants. Some terrorism doesn't even necessarily have casualties, ecoterrorists blowing up cars is /terrorism/ because the intent is to create fear. :p

The unabomber is considered a terrorist, mostly because he had a manifesto-goal, the bombs were indiscriminate, and one of the goals was getting the attention of the general public to advance his agenda. Which also looks to be the case with this Norwegian guy.

You are essentially agreeing with me though >.>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back