Breaking News: Hostages taken in Sydney

[bitslice]

Strange, just as type this message, BBC news is reporting a school shooting incident in Pakistan! Well I never.

Well yes, that's why I wrote it...

I even included the words
"What about the people who have died in Pakistan" as a clue

Magnolia doesn't feel sad about 100 brown people, but he insists we feel sad about 2 white people, because they are on TV, and well they are white innit?



.

 

[RoboCod]

I see your point

 

[Sankari]

I'm aware that aus is conservative, I'm just mocking the twitter hipsters that crawl out if the woodwork with their hashtags.

What 'twitter hipsters' are you referring to?

 

[Johno please?]

It's 'Cue'.

And if you want to go there, I notice there's a distinct lack of this Forums usual 'Happy Eid!' brigade here 'not condoning' his actions.

But then if you draw a cartoon of a supposed sky pixie, there's Worldwide outrage and condemnation from certain Religious followers, they're out on the streets protesting about it, but suicide bombings and chopping innocent peoples heads off hardly raises an eyebrow...

If you honestly think Religion had nothing to do with this guy and it was just because he was 'Mentally Ill', then you're the ones with a possible mental problem, he was ideologically blinded by his Religious beliefs, trying to deny this is preposterous in the extreme, if you genuinely cannot see Religion played a huge part in this tragedy (As usual sadly) you are deluded.

Well said. I'm not quite sure what these sickos have to gain from murdering kids at a school either.

 

[FTM]

Well said. I'm not quite sure what these sickos have to gain from murdering kids at a school either.

presumably its because 'God is Great'

 

[Amp34]

Yes, we must ignore his ideology and beliefs as they pose awkward questions.

What, the ideology he "converted" to two weeks prior that meant he did a 'caught bank robber' hostage situation and wanted to talk live on air to the prime minister, conveniently after his appeal had been refused...

Let's not let fact get in the way of a good Muslim bash!

 

[Danthus]

What, the ideology he "converted" to two weeks prior that meant he did a 'caught bank robber' hostage situation and wanted to talk live on air to the prime minister, conveniently after his appeal had been refused...

Let's not let fact get in the way of a good Muslim bash!

He was a Shia Muslim who converted to a Sunni Muslim.

 

[balky12]

He was a Shia Muslim who converted to a Sunni Muslim.

Game. Set. match.

Seriously, why are people trying to defend him (amp34)? Or his beliefs? Especially when he took a Muslim flag (albeit the wrong one) and then requested the ISIS flag.

You can't then say it had nothing to do with religion.

 

[Amp34]

It's 'Cue'.

And if you want to go there, I notice there's a distinct lack of this Forums usual 'Happy Eid!' brigade here 'not condoning' his actions.

But then if you draw a cartoon of a supposed sky pixie, there's Worldwide outrage and condemnation from certain Religious followers, they're out on the streets protesting about it, but suicide bombings and chopping innocent peoples heads off hardly raises an eyebrow...

If you honestly think Religion had nothing to do with this guy and it was just because he was 'Mentally Ill', then you're the ones with a possible mental problem, he was ideologically blinded by his Religious beliefs, trying to deny this is preposterous in the extreme, if you genuinely cannot see Religion played a huge part in this tragedy (As usual sadly) you are deluded.

This nicely sums up my feeling on the matter.

Sydney siege: don't call Man Haron Monis a 'terrorist' - it only helps Isis

The lone gunman behind the Sydney siege was an unstable wannabe leader driven by a desire for notoriety. He was not a terrorist

http://gu.com/p/4482a

Unfortunately it won't help those set on their extremist holy war against Muslims...

 

[Amp34]

Game. Set. match.

Seriously, why are people trying to defend him (amp34)? Or his beliefs? Especially when he took a Muslim flag (albeit the wrong one) and then requested the ISIS flag.

You can't then say it had nothing to do with religion.

No, not understanding what I'm saying...

I do question how anyone in their right minds think I am defending anything he has done or him at all...? It just shows the blinkered nature of certain people on this forum which led me to post what I did in my first post.

What I'm saying however is the usual idiots are jumping on a quite frankly violent person and proclaiming that rather than him being a violent, unstable idiot, it's because he is a Muslim... I'll remember than next time a Christian kills someone.

 

[balky12]

No, not understanding what I'm saying...

I do question how anyone in their right minds think I am defending anything he has done or him at all...? It just shows the blinkered nature of certain people on this forum which led me to post what I did in my first post.

What I'm saying however is the usual idiots are jumping on a quite frankly violent person and proclaiming that rather than him being a violent, unstable idiot, it's because he is a Muslim... I'll remember than next time a Christian kills someone.

I understand you. But given the circumstances, religion got brought into it when he decided to bring an Islamic flag along with him.

If he had just done what he did with no flag then I would agree, he was a nut who perhaps just happened to be a Muslim.

The fact that he brought an Islamic flag, then requested an ISIS flag, shows that it had religious conotations behind it.

 

[Amp34]

It's because to me (and many others it seems) this is a case of a man how is violent and mentally unstable using religion as an "excuse", whereas others appear to be suggesting it is a potentially normal person turned by religion.

There is a significant difference between the two, yet too many people on this forum are so vehemently anti Muslim (and many are also anti non white British as a whole) they cling to blaming Islam at any chance they get.

 

[Amp34]

I understand you. But given the circumstances, religion got brought into it when he decided to bring an Islamic flag along with him.

If he had just done what he did with no flag then I would agree, he was a nut who perhaps just happened to be a Muslim.

The fact that he brought an Islamic flag, then requested an ISIS flag, shows that it had religious conotations behind it.

The point is did he do it in the name of Islam after becoming radicalised, or did he do it because he was a mentally unstable, violent person who decided he would "pin his colours to the mast".

 

[Danthus]

The point is did he do it in the name of Islam after becoming radicalised, or did he do it because he was a mentally unstable, violent person who decided he would "pin his colours to the mast".

Why the flag then?

 

[Amp34]

Re read my last couple of posts. If you still can't work it out then...

 

[Above&Beyond]

It's because to me (and many others it seems) this is a case of a man how is violent and mentally unstable using religion as an "excuse", whereas others appear to be suggesting it is a potentially normal person turned by religion.

There is a significant difference between the two, yet too many people on this forum are so vehemently anti Muslim (and many are also anti non white British as a whole) they cling to blaming Islam at any chance they get.

Why are you trying to downplay the jihadist aspect of the story? It was a key demand to have the ISIS flag taken to him. Trying to say he was mentally ill, which he may have been, doesn't mean the ISIS part of the story is to be dismissed. I think joining ISIS or carrying out an attack in their name probably requires some degree of mental illness anyway.

Playing the race card doesn't help either.

 

[Amp34]

It's about there being a middle ground. Basically just saying, 'lol it's okay guys, he was just crackers' is stupid. Obviously people come out with that stuff because it a) might be the case, or b) to balance out the awful Islamophobes, or c) to try and show just how beautifully liberal and loving they are, or whatever else. But it's insane! Of course we should look any possible religious cause (or partial cause)... surely it should go without saying we can look at combating radicalisation, and so forth, without in any way saying Muslims are all awful. If he was a mental person who found Islam as a crutch, and then an excuse, or whatever... that doesn't mean we should just ignore the second part, it means we should look at how to stop similarly mental people being similarly radicalised, if there was a religious motivation behind the actions (which it seems there was, given the paraphernalia he took...)

I'm not suggesting we shouldn't look in to it, rather that the usual people are latching on to a small part of the overall picture without actually looking at the whole picture. We should be looking to see if there is a religious cause, we should just as well be looking in to how his failed appeal affected him and how his past (violence, abuse and murder) affected this situation. Unfortunately this thread hasn't done that, all it ended up was the typical inflaming of religious hatred against Muslims, which happens time and time again.

I presume, coming from Iran he would have been born Muslim and then grew into a mentally unstable, violent individual. Id also say he then converted to Sunni because of the links with another violent bunch of people, ISIS. I'd suggest Islam didn't shape him but he my have integrated his own *********** version of teachings (he proclaimed himself a sheik...) to justify what he was doing.

 

[Danthus]

I'm not suggesting we shouldn't look in to it, rather that the usual people are latching on to a small part of the overall picture without actually looking at the whole picture. We should be looking to see if there is a religious cause, we should just as well be looking in to how his failed appeal affected him and how his past (violence, abuse and murder) affected this situation. Unfortunately this thread hasn't done that, all it ended up was the typical inflaming of religious hatred against Muslims, which happens time and time again.

I presume, coming from Iran he would have been born Muslim and then grew into a mentally unstable, violent individual. Id also say he then converted to Sunni because of the links with another violent bunch of people, ISIS. I'd suggest Islam didn't shape him but he my have integrated his own *********** version of teachings (he proclaimed himself a sheik...) to justify what he was doing.

You make him sound like a victim!

 

[Amp34]

Why are you trying to downplay the jihadist aspect of the story? It was a key demand to have the ISIS flag taken to him. Trying to say he was mentally ill, which he may have been, doesn't mean the ISIS part of the story is to be dismissed. I think joining ISIS or carrying out an attack in their name probably requires some degree of mental illness anyway.

Playing the race card doesn't help either.

Did he proclaim a jihad? Did he proclaim he was doing what he was doing for Islam? Did he have any links to ISIS? Was the siege a typical ISIS/Islamic fundamentalist attack? Why instead were his demands to talk to the prime minister live on air and for a flag?

If not why?

Why don't you go and read the link up the page... The writer is far more eloquent than me.

 

[scorza]

Did he proclaim a jihad? Did he proclaim he was doing what he was doing for Islam? Did he have any links to ISIS? Was the siege a typical ISIS/Islamic fundamentalist attack?

If not why?

Why don't you go and read the link up the page... The writer is far more eloquent than me.

You're in complete denial.