It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by HamrHeed
Do you have any proof that he was a christian or are you just guessing like everyone else?
You may be right, but there seems to be nearly infinitely more "crazies" in this particular terrorism movement than in any other. Why is that? And what name can we come up with for those people? Arabic (or Persian) religious delusionals?
And it is the work of "crazies."
Originally posted by CoolerAbdullah786
reply to post by Wertdagf
[...] You are the one promoting exterminating religion.
I am merely curious as to how you wish to achieve it.
Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by SnedsDawg
It's counterproductive to ignore one extremist and focus on the other.
Extremism is a product of poor education and manipulation.
Originally posted by borntowatch
The "No true Scotsman argument", how ridiculous.
A Christian is not a word or a name. A Christian is a Christian by their actions.
Unlike Muslims and their god muhamed who had a child bride and killed many, Jesus taught we, His followers are to be servants of others as He was, to lay down our lives as Christ laid down His own.
Many people claim Christianity but do not practice the faith.
Brevick denied he was Christian, clearly your argument is nonsense.
Muslims me are taught in the koran to kill, Christians are not
Your argument is fallicious
Christians at their death in battle dont receive an endless amount of virgin brides in heaven, there is no reward for killing,
Originally posted by CoolerAbdullah786
reply to post by Murgatroid
Read his manifesto. He spells it out plainly. Did you even read my OP? He definitely used Christianity (and Islamophobia) to justify his killing.
Originally posted by Bixxi3
Im not sure if this has been pointed out but..
While i agree with you OP on the hypocrisy.
I think there is a big difference in this example. That guy acted alone, he wasn't part of a christian terrorist cell or group. He was just a lone nut job.
BTW well done in tryingto educate people on the jihad subject. The word is such a obvious tool used to herd the sheep.
edit on 11-7-2012 by Bixxi3 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by borntowatch
The "No true Scotsman argument", how ridiculous.
A Christian is not a word or a name. A Christian is a Christian by their actions.
Unlike Muslims and their god muhamed who had a child bride and killed many,
Jesus taught we, His followers are to be servants of others as He was, to lay down our lives as Christ laid down His own.
Many people claim Christianity but do not practice the faith.
Muslims me are taught in the koran to kill, Christians are not
Your argument is fallicious
Christians at their death in battle dont receive an endless amount of virgin brides in heaven, there is no reward for killing,
Originally posted by HamrHeed
Well said. I don't even bother trying to explain anymore, even though thats probably not a good idea.
It's tiring explaining our faith to uneducated people who are just trolling.
If anything, muslims should understand our plight (explaining our faith to people who don't want to understand it)
They just want to attack
Originally posted by borntowatch
Brevick denied he was Christian, clearly your argument is nonsense.
Muslims are taught in the koran to kill, Christians are not
The Jihadist Roots of the Norway Massacre
Anders Breivik, who went on a shooting spree in Norway last year, killing some 70 people, recently confessed his inspiration: al-Qaeda, the jihadists par excellence of the modern world.
According to AFP, “The gunman behind the Norway massacres said he was inspired by al-Qaida as he took the stand Tuesday [4/17] at his trial…. he described himself as a ‘militant nationalist’ and, using the pronoun ‘we’ to suggest he was part of a larger group, added: ‘We have drawn from al-Qaida and militant Islamists. You can see al-Qaida as the most successful militant group in the world.’”
Not only was he “inspired” by al-Qaeda, but his very tactics mirrored those of the jihadist organization. According to the AP, Breivik testified “that he had planned to capture and decapitate” the former Norwegian Prime Minister, with the plan “to film the beheading and post the video on the Internet,” adding that “he was inspired by al-Qaida’s use of decapitation,” which he described “as a very powerful psychological weapon.”
Even so, the media has inclined to focus on Breivik’s fascination with Christian historical groups like the Knights Templar—without bothering to explain exactly how a military order devoted to protecting Christian pilgrims inspired Breivik to murder innocent Norwegian children. As one historian put it, the original Knights Templar, a “very devout people,” would be “horrified” to be associated with Breivik.
In short, whereas Breivik’s goals may have been anti-Islamic in nature, his actions, those things which we are rightly judged by—in this case, terror, murder, and planned beheadings—were jihadist in essence.
The Jihadist Roots of the Norway Massacre
On May 3, 2010 a federal judge ordered that all nine members be freed on bond until their trial, saying that prosecutors were not able to demonstrate that the defendants would pose a danger if released. On March 28, 2012, a judge found the government's conspiracy case against the members based on their protected free speech to be baseless. Only a few weapons charges remain.
Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by CoolerAbdullah786
Dear CoolerAbdullah786,
It may not be wise to base your argument on the Hutaree, the nine people you call a Christian terrorist cell.
On May 3, 2010 a federal judge ordered that all nine members be freed on bond until their trial, saying that prosecutors were not able to demonstrate that the defendants would pose a danger if released. On March 28, 2012, a judge found the government's conspiracy case against the members based on their protected free speech to be baseless. Only a few weapons charges remain.
en.wikipedia.org...
It seems you have no grounds for calling them a Christian terrorist cell. But now I know what term you want to use instead of jihad. Those Muslims are members of an Islamic terrorist cell, and so I shall continue to describe them. After all, you picked the name.
With respect,
Charles1952