Please note that the title was taken from the Guardian article I linked. Please also note that at the time the thread was posted, most articles were speculating in that direction.
It may have been proved wrong now...but what is so unreasonable about arriving at an initial conclusion that it was Islamist militants? They have a proven track record of doing stuff like this. Norway has forces in Afghanistan. Norway reprinted the cartoons and received death threats. Are we supposed to be thankful it wasn't Islamist militants? Excuse me for not giving Islamist militants the benefit of the doubt as they deserve the benefit of the doubt that it wasn't them...NOT.
No reason to blame the OP for a title lifted from a mainstream media website. Just about everyone, including Islamic extremists, initially believed this to be the work of an Islamic terrorist group and there is good reason why. http://spectator.org/blog/2011/07/22/why-it-wasnt-unreasonable-to-s#
I bet you wouldn't have posted this if you didn't assume it was a Muslim. So while I agree it was newsworthy, there was nothing really to debate. In hindsight, I guess we could debate how much of a bigot you and others are. Thank you for the self-ownage.
And you would absolutely lose that bet. I posted it, knowing that the identity of the attacker had not been determined. This is news worthy of discussion, regardless of whether the attacker is Muslim, Klingon, white, black, yellow. It was the first major terrorist attack in Europe in years. In fact, any neutral observer who reads this thread should be able to see who is being prejudiced here - those who use this tragedy to stage a little victory dance and point fingers just because this one time it wasn't Islamist terrorists.
Did you just... imply statistics justify racism? I mean, if you hear a news about inner city crime, do you immediately start shouting "Must be done by a black guy" ? Because, hey, statistics are on your side right You're ridiculous
Tell me, where was your premise for debate in the OP? You said nothing. What subject were you exactly trying to debate? That "uh-oh, those dam moslems are at it againn, see I tolya sooo"? There's no way to prove otherwise but if I had to place a bet, it would be that you posted this due to your Islamaphobia.
I remember when 9/11 happened, Hakeem Olajuwon was quoted as saying something along the lines of "please say that this is not the work of muslim terrorists" this is not a celebration but the first initial thought is not to put blame on an entire group of people. and I am thankful this time it is not the work of Islamist militants as originally suspected by the OP and media outlets. I am thankful that this time, muslims don't get the blame for a horrible event, but moreso that opportunists cannot jump on this or lead themselves to make to comments like this I have made the mistake of engaging with ATW for the first time in board history (for that I sincerely apologize), however I stand behind every one of posts in this thread, not as a celebration, but as a reminder that we (including the media) shouldn't be so quick to jump the gun. I have also stated my opinion of an article that is completely hypothetical and even drove another poster on the board to ridicule Islam further when it has nothing to do with the story. you were saying, Commodore? shame on those media outlets for fueling such hatred and Islamophobia. I'll say it again, and it has already been repeated. the article, and a few responses here, basically reinforce why it is wrong to jump to such conclusions. I don't care "why" muslims "might have" fallen under suspicion. most people that woke up yesterday and opened D&D might not of even known about the incident. talk about swaying a jury's opinion. my simple observation was any other headline would have given the emerging details of a developing, horrifying news story, which has been acknowledged to be a horrible day for Norway and its people... just horrible details about that youth camp... what a sick evil b*stard
I don't think it is unreasonable to suspect Islamic extremist but I do think it is unreasonable to have jumped to a conclusion that it was Muslims in the first few hours after the attack. I saw on another news site where in the comments section of the initial story people started putting on post about "this is why Norway and Western countries need to get rid of all Muslims" and various other anti-Muslims views. Its not a matter of giving them the benefit of the doubt but a matter of not clouding one's judgement ahead of time. History has shown there have been plenty of cases where jumping to a conclusion has led to greater tragedy such as the Rosewood massacre. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosewood_massacre
That only shows your prejudice, not mine. You accuse me of something that only exists in your head. It is common practice that if there are events that dominate world headlines, these are posted here. This was all over the news on all news outlets, I was actually surprised that nobody had posted it yet. When Ms. Gifford was shot, it was posted in the D&D. Did you ask the question "what subject were you exactly trying to debate?" Of course you did not. Again - your prejudice, not mine.
D&D isn't strictly for debating. Its a forum for discussing serious news matters that might lead to debate topics. Even if this story had nothing to do with Islam, its a D&D topic because politics is clearly involved.
Please note that I did not make any such comment, yet, certain posters here act as if I had made such a comment.
No you did not and I was responding to Surfguy's post and I am pleasently surprised at how you have for the most part been open to the facts of this case.
Yes, thanks - sorry, this wasn't directed at you specifically, I just wanted to keep repeating this because posters are still coming out of the bushes acting like I did.
Please either provide proof that I personally suspected Islamist militants or retract this statement. As stated numerous times, I quoted an article and a headline from a leading news outlet verbatim. I did not state my own suspicion (other than commenting on someone else's assumption that Gaddhafi might be involved). Thank you in advance. You keep acting as if it makes it any better that this was not committed by Islamists. The crime and the suffering of the victims are just as terrible. But you are "thankful"? Just because you "stand behind them" does not make them any better. Your initial remark in this thread was still insulting and stupid: That's a fair point (not to jump to conclusions). But I don't think it has anything to do with Islamophobia. It is normal that when something like this happens, everyone asks the question "who did it", so it is actually the media's task to speculate. And it is understandable that they look for the most likely scenarios. They just need to clearly label what is speculation and what isn't. Matter of fact, one Islamist organization claimed responsibility. Again, you keep ignoring comments by myself and several other posters that this headline was not my wording and that basically ALL media outlets (even Al Jazeera) were speculating that this might be the work of Islamist terrorists. Yes.
LOL, calm down, captain indignation. News organizations assuming that a terrorist attack in a European country is related to fundamentalist Islam isn't exactly a huge leap of faith. Blacks commit, what, about half of the crimes in the U.S.? That's a far cry from the 99.98% of modern terrorist attacks that are perpetrated in the name of Islam... a number that goes even higher when you focus on Europe (in particular Scandinavia), which experiences the largest amount of Islamic related terrorist attacks in the West.
Where were you to complain, whine and accuse when this thread was started by rimrocker? http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?t=198760&highlight=gifford rocketsjudoka himself started a thread a few days ago: Alleged ISI Agent Arrested for US Political Contributions His only comment in the opening post was: My point not being a criticism of rocketsjudoka, but that it is absolutely standard practice to start a thread (especially on a developing story) without much comment in the initial post. Where were you to complain, whine and accuse then? And one by yourself in which you just posted something without any comment: http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?t=156730 And another one in which you basically re-posted an article and just said: Not that that is a huge difference to starting a thread with an article (especially on current breaking news, developing story) and let the discussion run its course...without a one-sentence comment that essentially says nothing.
It was a developing story when he posted it, but clearly newsworthy nevertheless. What great insight was he or any of us supposed to have when the details weren't in? In fact, if his commentary in the initial post was some lengthy anti-Islam rant based on the speculation, that would be something really worth criticizing.
