Nationalism, immigration and racism in the EU

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
Awful, but not sure what it has to do with immigration?

It might have something to do with nationalism, racism or both, though. And I'm going out on a limb here and guessing it might have something to do with Islamism and Syria.
 
Last edited:

droid

Well-known member
Entirely possible, but what percentage of terror attacks over the last 10 years in Europe do you think are connected to Islam?
 

droid

Well-known member
You obviously have an opinion seeing as you reflexively link news of a terror attack with Islam and immigration.

terror_pie_chart-2006-13_rev1.png
 
Last edited:

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
I'm not sure what your point is - I didn't say it was definitely Islamists, did I? I'm saying that whoever is behind it, it's probably not unconnected with the fact that France is not exactly an exemplar of successful multiculturalism and racial equality. Brievik's atrocity certainly had something to do with "nationalism, immigration and racism", didn't it?

They're now saying more than 120 dead - this is fucking unbelievable.
 

trza

Well-known member
I was just about to make a terrible joke about Jihadi John dying in a drone strike before the attacks hit the news.
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
It's very disingenuous - date range excludes the Madrid bombings, London 7/7 and everything that's happened after 2013. But even after that, 68% of deaths are due to Islamist terrorism.

Droid, a couple of weeks ago you were roundly mocking me for describing what you called the "myth" of the self-loathing, pro-Islamist lefty. Now I don't know or care who these Counterfire wankers are - although I think I can pretty much get the measure of them from the name alone - but consider: to present a purported analysis of "all terror attacks whether foiled or completed" without considering at all the severity or scale of each attack, while including such irrelevant bollocks as bolshy Basques smashing up phone boxes or whatever Spanish separatist criminal damage might mean and using an arbitrary start date of 2006 to exclude two bombings that claimed 243 lives and maimed 2,500 people between them, as well as cutting off in 2013 so as to exclude the various attempted and actual atrocities in France in the last two years, as HMG says - and that's before you consider that nearly all the plots documented in the UK are described as 'not specified', despite presumably including the chapati flour bomb plot, the underpants bomber, the Lee Rigby murder and god knows what else:

What possible purpose does all that serve other than to deliberately downplay the prevalence and severity of Islamist terror in Europe since 2001? They are openly and transparently propagandising for the jihadis - and so are you by posting it here. That's all there is to it.
 
Last edited:

droid

Well-known member
Both of you are full of it.

Ive read that Europol report from cover to cover. Its not 'disingenuous'. It starts in 2006 because thats when they started collecting data.

You've completely failed to grasp the basic fact that the survey was completed not by some 'self-loathing pro-islamist lefties', but by an official conservative European security organisation.

You can argue about the definition of 'terrorism' or the number or severity of attacks, or you could include 'allegations' by the UK security services, or you could take account of the fact that since 2011 ALL religiously motivated attacks are included in the 'Islamist' category, or you could make statements like:

They are openly and transparently propagandising for the jihadis - and so are you by posting it here. That's all there is to it.

So Europol is 'openly and transparently propagandising for the jihadis'?

Seriously?

What is wrong with you? This is the very definition of reactionary.

Of course it was motherfucking Islamists.

Thats what they said immediately after Brevik as well wasnt it? More to the point thats exactly what you thought, because, as we all know, Islam has a monopoly on terror.
 
Last edited:
You're right! Islamist terror attacks are simply not a problem in Europe right now.

Glad you cut through the bullshit by sharing this report, Droid. It's those fucking Wiccans setting light to bins we need to worry about.
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
Ive read that Europol report from cover to cover. Its not 'disingenuous'. It starts in 2006 because thats when they started collecting data.

You didn't post a link to Europol though, did you? You posted a pie chart created by some people called Counterfire, blatantly intended to give the impression that Islamist terror is an insignificant proportion of all terrorism that's happened in Europe in the recent past. Which is clearly bullshit, as you well know.

And no, I don't accept that the simple number of "foiled or successful plots" is a good metric of the total "amount" of terrorism going on. A terror "plot" that begins and ends when some tragic special-needs case gets arrested for googling how 2 buy ricin on a public library computer is not equivalent to a sophisticated multiple bombing committed by a cell of Afghan-trained terrorists that kills tens or hundreds of people. If you take into account the scale of successful attacks, the picture for the last decade and a half looks like this:

20150117_gdm001_1.png


As you can see, Islamist terror accounts for the overwhelming majority of fatal attacks. And fatal non-Islamist attacks would have been almost negligible but for a single man.

Thats what they said immediately after Brevik as well wasnt it? More to the point thats exactly what you thought, because, as we all know, Islam has a monopoly on terror.

Islamism certainly has a monopoly or near-monopoly on deadly terror attacks in France in recent years. Are you seriously telling me you didn't assume it was an Islamist attack when you first heard about it? Who's "full of it" now?
 
Last edited:

luka

Well-known member
You're getting trounced by Mr Tea droid fucking hell how embarrassing. That will never happen to me
 
Top