Terrorist attack in France, Lyon

[Napoléon]

As usual, François Hollande is saying this has nothing to do with Islam (he also said the attacks in Tunisia are not related to France, which there is no evidence until now so he's not wrong on that)

Quite frankly, if that's true then it's one of the biggest coincidences of all time.

ISIS has been banging on about ramping up terrorist attacks during ramadan for a while.

On the same day there are three major terrorist attacks all committed by those who claim to be members of ISIS. That's no coincidence if you ask me. I'd say it's far more likely than not that this was a co-ordinated effort, and to say they're not related seems a little bit silly when they've all been done to send a message. Mowing down tourists. Blowing up a Shia mosque. Beheading French workers and then writing Arabic bullshit over his decapitated head.

ALL ON THE SAME FUCKIN DAY.

I really think it's stupid to suggest these attacks aren't related.

[Dystopia]

As usual, François Hollande is saying this has nothing to do with Islam (he also said the attacks in Tunisia are not related to France, which there is no evidence until now so he's not wrong on that)

Quite frankly, if that's true then it's one of the biggest coincidences of all time.

ISIS has been banging on about ramping up terrorist attacks during ramadan for a while.

On the same day there are three major terrorist attacks all committed by those who claim to be members of ISIS. That's no coincidence if you ask me. I'd say it's far more likely than not that this was a co-ordinated effort, and to say they're not related seems a little bit silly when they've all been done to send a message. Mowing down tourists. Blowing up a Shia mosque. Beheading French workers and then writing Arabic bullshit over his decapitated head.

ALL ON THE SAME FUCKIN DAY.

I really think it's stupid to suggest these attacks aren't related.

I'm just saying we don't have any verifiable proof that the attacks are related - Even if all members are terrorists they could be from different organizations or sects of the same organization. When I say "related" I mean coordinated by the same people to achieve some kind of global/regional effect. But you may be right.

Supposedly the EU is going to take more 60000 refugees a year and some may come from the arab spring zone. I'm not concerned with innocent suffering immigrants but with the fact terrorist infiltrate themselves purposefully in these cases, they're not dumb - Not to mention some countries in the EU literally can't feed more immigrants, some of us can't even feed our citizens and have 15%+ unemployment.

[Jackalope]

I fear this is Gods judgement for the crimes against marriage that have taken place in the western world.

Hey, you could be right. The western world has been persecuting minorities with respect to marriage for too long. Perhaps the big guy is still pissed off about it.

[Pyrrho]

... A lot of people are fucking stupid and ignorant and willingly believe in bullshit even when it is so clearly vile and abhorrent.

...

I don't think that is quite right.  People believe a lot of stupid nonsense because they were indoctrinated into it.  It is not that they all "willingly" believe anything; it is that people tend to believe what they are indoctrinated to believe.

When I was growing up, I was not given the option to be raised in a non-Christian home.  And, of course, when one is an infant, one cannot decide such things anyway, even if we made some pretense and let children point to pictures of people and have them raised by whoever they pointed to.

Belief is not decided by pure act of will.  You could probably not believe in god no matter how hard you tried.  Likewise, many people believe in god, without it being a choice or act of will.

[Napoléon]

I don't think that is quite right.  People believe a lot of stupid nonsense because they were indoctrinated into it.  It is not that they all "willingly" believe anything; it is that people tend to believe what they are indoctrinated to believe.

When I was growing up, I was not given the option to be raised in a non-Christian home.  And, of course, when one is an infant, one cannot decide such things anyway, even if we made some pretense and let children point to pictures of people and have them raised by whoever they pointed to.

Belief is not decided by pure act of will.  You could probably not believe in god no matter how hard you tried.  Likewise, many people believe in god, without it being a choice or act of will.

I disagree.

Obviously not everyone has the chance to realise their brand of indoctrination is false. But that's not what I said.

I stand by what I stated. However you presumably made a conscious decision to assess your own belief, at some point as you got older. A lot of people don't want to do this and are willfully ignorant.

Besides. Your argument is flawed merely for the fact that not everyone was or is indoctrinated.

[Pyrrho]

...
As usual, François Hollande is saying this has nothing to do with Islam (he also said the attacks in Tunisia are not related to France, which there is no evidence until now so he's not wrong on that) and so are other news outlets and politicians. People need to wake up. If every Muslim was like Reza Aslan or Majid Nawaz we wouldn't have any problems.

Although what François Hollande is saying in that is false, he is saying that because he is interested in a more important truth, which is that it is the action of some Muslim people rather than the entire group of people who are Muslims.  François Hollande is interested in stopping bigots from attacking Muslims who had nothing to do with the attack.  He is also interested in having as many Muslims on France's side as possible, and that is best accomplished in saying what he is saying.

Saying the more complicated truth would be problematic because idiotic bigots need simple statements or they will not understand what is being said.  After all, if they were smart, they would not be idiotic bigots at all.

[Brakeman]

I fear this is Gods judgement for the crimes against marriage that have taken place in the western world. When the Roman Empire fell into decadence God swept it away and let it fall to the pagan barbarians, now God is using the Mohammadans to purge the sins of the west.

A funny thing about your limp dicked impotent god is that he can't do ANYTHING that wouldn't or couldn't have happened by the natural world anymore. In the old bible story days he could smite with lightning and hellfire and brimstone from the skies or unimaginably massive torrents of water coming out of windows of the firmament.

Now he's soo impotent the best he can do is appear on toast and take credit from the barbarity of muslims.. So pathetic.

I bet god caught syphilis from goat whores just like his friends moses and jesus.

[Pyrrho]

I don't think that is quite right.  People believe a lot of stupid nonsense because they were indoctrinated into it.  It is not that they all "willingly" believe anything; it is that people tend to believe what they are indoctrinated to believe.

When I was growing up, I was not given the option to be raised in a non-Christian home.  And, of course, when one is an infant, one cannot decide such things anyway, even if we made some pretense and let children point to pictures of people and have them raised by whoever they pointed to.

Belief is not decided by pure act of will.  You could probably not believe in god no matter how hard you tried.  Likewise, many people believe in god, without it being a choice or act of will.

I disagree.

Obviously not everyone has the chance to realise their brand of indoctrination is false. But that's not what I said.

I stand by what I stated. However you presumably made a conscious decision to assess your own belief, at some point as you got older. A lot of people don't want to do this and are willfully ignorant.

Besides. Your argument is flawed merely for the fact that not everyone was or is indoctrinated.

Some people are smarter than others.  That is not a matter of their choice.  That I was smart enough to figure out the fact that Christianity is bullshit does not mean that everyone is.  Nor can I say that my level of indoctrination was the same as others, though I am sure that it was more thorough than many receive, judging from what they say about it at places like this site.  But if I had been in a more primitive society, it could have been even worse, as there would not have been some of the other influences that were helpful to me.

As for the desire to assess belief, questioning things is considered wrong in most religions, and one is risking hellfire and damnation in doing so, according to many.  Some people have a great deal of difficulty in overcoming indoctrination of that risk, and so they try to think about other things because of this indoctrination.  It is not as if they had a free choice made in the absence of any indoctrination; their choices are after the indoctrination, and are therefore not independent of their indoctrination.

As for those who were not indoctrinated, how many religious people are there who were not indoctrinated into religion in their youth?  There are some religious people who I have heard claim to have been raised as atheists, but with every case that I have examined, the truth is that they were raised to believe religious nonsense, just not the exact brand of it they currently espouse.  Many religious people are liars who have no scruples about lying for a holy cause.  Of course, not all feel that way; when I was religious, I found that attitude abhorrent.  But, I was raised to abhor such lies, so I cannot take any great credit for having been an honest Christian in my youth.

Can you give even one example where you are sure that the person was not indoctrinated, but believes religious nonsense?  Is there even one person you can name who was properly taught to think critically who believes religious twaddle?  If you come up with an example, the first question will be, how do you know that that person was not indoctrinated?

[Napoléon]

how do you know that that person was not indoctrinated?

And what evidence do you have that they all are? None.

You're the one who claims everyone who believes is indoctrinated. Why do I have to disprove that again?? Burden of proof much?

[Pyrrho]

how do you know that that person was not indoctrinated?

And what evidence do you have that they all are? None.

You're the one who claims everyone who believes is indoctrinated. Why do I have to disprove that again?? Burden of proof much?

That is ironic, since you were the one claiming that people "willingly believe" and I was simply questioning that claim of yours.  If you were serious about people making claims having the burden of proof, you would accept the burden and prove your claim, or admit that you are talking out of your ass.  Instead, you are dishonestly trying to shift the burden onto me.