• As China bans the burqa in the city of Xinjiang, six alleged suicide bombers are killed
    45 replies, posted
[QUOTE][B]BEIJING[/B] -- Chinese police shot and killed six would-be bombers Monday in the latest violence to strike the restive far northwestern region of Xinjiang, a local government spokesman and official website said.Police were called to a business district in the town of Shule in the morning to investigate a suspicious man carrying what appeared to be an explosive device, according to TS News, which specializes in news about Xinjiang. It said the man was shot and killed after he charged police with an axe and attempted to detonate the device. Another five suspects with bombs were also shot and killed as police conducted a cleanup operation, the site said, without elaborating. It said no officers or onlookers were injured. An official with the Shule county propaganda department, who gave only his surname, Yu, confirmed the report but declined to offer further details. hinese authorities tightly control information from the Xinjiang region, and independent accounts of events there are not available. No word was given on the identity of the suspects. At least 400 people have been killed in and outside the region over the past two years in violence China blames on radicals among[URL="http://www.cbsnews.com/news/chinas-uighur-minority-subjected-to-collective-punishment/"]Xinjiang's native Uighur ethnic group.[/URL] Homemade explosive devices have often featured in the violence, which has ranged from assaults on police stations to knife attacks on train travelers. Critics and human rights advocates say Uighurs have chafed under the repressive rule of the Han Chinese-dominated government and complain of economic disenfranchisement with the inflow of Han Chinese to their homeland.[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.cbsnews.com/news/china-police-kill-6-would-be-uighur-suicide-bombers/[/url] That region is gonna reach its boiling point soon.
Not really boiling point. There are just that mnay people willing to be suicide bombers or willing to fight the government in other ways. Recent events made these people get out of hiding. They will be killed. Other will submit to new rules. That will be it. Unless Chinese radical muslims will find help from outside that is.
[QUOTE=MuffinZerg;46917396]Not really boiling point. There are just that mnay people willing to be suicide bombers or willing to fight the government in other ways. Recent events made these people get out of hiding. [B]They will be killed. Other will submit to new rules. That will be it.[/B] Unless Chinese radical muslims will find help from outside that is.[/QUOTE] I hope you are right because history has shown that extremists don't often go that easily. That said it IS the chinese government and on their land too. And the Chinese don't fuck around when it comes to using force.
These people are big babies. "I'm gonna kill myself and everyone around me cuz burquas are illegal now!!!!"
[QUOTE=agentfazexx;46917572]These people are big babies. "I'm gonna kill myself and everyone around me cuz burquas are illegal now!!!!"[/QUOTE] Banning the Burqas is a big deal. I don't agree that trying to suicide bomb people is an appropriate reaction but don't trivialize the fact that China has been trying to make it illegal to practice Islam in that area recently.
I always forget how close China comes to the middle east, they share a border with Afghanistan, even.
[QUOTE=InvaderNouga;46917591]Banning the Burqas is a big deal. I don't agree that trying to suicide bomb people is an appropriate reaction but don't trivialize the fact that China has been trying to make it illegal to practice Islam in that area recently.[/QUOTE] Not trivializing anything. I'm making fun of the overreacting, pussy jihadist idiots.
[QUOTE=Unit-05;46917558]I hope you are right because history has shown that extremists don't often go that easily. That said it IS the chinese government and on their land too. And the Chinese don't fuck around when it comes to using force.[/QUOTE] Exactly. Chinese won't bother with human rights when dealing with such a threat, so they can really wipe out the agressive elements.
[QUOTE=MuffinZerg;46917396]Not really boiling point. There are just that mnay people willing to be suicide bombers or willing to fight the government in other ways. Recent events made these people get out of hiding. They will be killed. Other will submit to new rules. That will be it. Unless Chinese radical muslims will find help from outside that is.[/QUOTE] It seems you've taken some really poor history classes. You don't fight an idealogical war like this. Why do you think the middle east is so destabilized, and has been for so long? This mentality of 'brute force, submit, obey' will never work, and only raises new generations of people who believe they are being oppressed, and resent the rest of worldwide society because of it. [editline]13th January 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=MuffinZerg;46917651]Exactly. Chinese won't bother with human rights when dealing with such a threat, so they can really wipe out the agressive elements.[/QUOTE] Are you real?
[QUOTE=bitches;46917656]It seems you've taken some really poor history classes. You don't fight an idealogical war like this. Why do you think the middle east is so destabilized, and has been for so long? This mentality of 'brute force, submit, obey' will never work, and only raises new generations of people who believe they are being oppressed, and resent the rest of worldwide society because of it. [editline]13th January 2015[/editline] Are you real?[/QUOTE] There is only one way to fight terrorists - the mossaad way. Others have proven to not work unless you have a better idelogoy to offer to people then terrorists( usually you don't ).
It's so much more complicated than 'those terrorists who will all get extinguished'. The vast majority will not even want to perform any terrorist actions, but the irritation they feel as a culture in that area will fester and cause problems with those born into it that become unstable for whatever reason people everywhere do. [editline]13th January 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=MuffinZerg;46917674]There is only one way to fight terrorists - the mossaad way. Others have proven to not work unless you have a better idelogoy to offer to people then terrorists( usually you don't ).[/QUOTE] You just said "Nuh uh!". I offered you an explanation as to why brute force does not work, and you tell me that there is only brute force. You say that others have proven to not work, but you evidently have no idea what you're talking about in terms of history. [editline]13th January 2015[/editline] I'm clearly arguing against a wall, the beautiful wall of FP sensationalist headlines shitposters. Time to do something with my day.
A lot of stuff to do with this article makes it seem that something fishy is going on. [quote]An official with the Shule county [b]propaganda department[/b], who gave only his surname, Yu, confirmed the report [b]but declined to offer further details[/b].[/quote] [quote]No word was given on the identity of the suspects.[/quote] I understand that the article does mention about the tight flow of information from China, but still, this looks really strange to me. Suicide bombers reacting to the burqa ban? The ban was implemented yesterday, right? I want give these alleged bombers the benefit of the doubt and say that they would be smart enough to plan something like this a bit longer in advance. [editline]13th January 2015[/editline] There's a lot more factors than just the burqu ban that could create tension in Xinjiang, but everything considered it makes it seem as if the whole story was made up.
[QUOTE=EditOutJ;46917802] Suicide bombers reacting to the burqa ban? The ban was implemented yesterday, right? I want give these alleged bombers the benefit of the doubt and say that they would be smart enough to plan something like this a bit longer in advance.[/QUOTE] I think you're giving them too much credit. Most people like that are so mentally fucked and just do stuff of a whim. I mean, they aint using too much logic when they think it's a good idea to blow themselves up for an insane reason.
[QUOTE=Duskin;46917826]I think you're giving them too much credit. Most people like that are so mentally fucked and just do stuff of a whim. I mean, they aint using too much logic when they think it's a good idea to blow themselves up for an insane reason.[/QUOTE] Back to my point that they're all morons.
[QUOTE=agentfazexx;46917598]Not trivializing anything. I'm making fun of the overreacting, pussy jihadist idiots.[/QUOTE] Have you ever said anything good?
[QUOTE=Duskin;46917826]I think you're giving them too much credit. Most people like that are so mentally fucked and just do stuff of a whim. I mean, they aint using too much logic when they think it's a good idea to blow themselves up for an insane reason.[/QUOTE] Successful terrorist attacks do take a lot of planning and information... ...so seeing as this did literally no damage , hurt no one and removed 6 dangerous extremists, yeah, these guys must of been pretty dumb. Whole thing is still quite suspicoius.
[QUOTE=Hat-Wearing Man;46917834]Have you ever said anything good?[/QUOTE] Are you offended by me talking shit about murderous brainwashed people? [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Will you ever improve at posting here?" - SteveUK))[/highlight]
Something seems very fishy about this story, I'm not sure I'd take it at face value.
Just a theory, but [i]should[/i] this news have been fabricated by the propaganda department, it does a lot of benefit for China if it was taken as true. It can help suppress any potential extremists in Xinjiang or just around China by making their actions seem futile against even just the police. And, going out on a really fucking long limb here, that it can be used to demonstrate superior ability when it comes to a country handling terrorist actions, if supposedly 6 terrorists just get shut down by the police with 0 harm, in light of recent incidents throughout the world.
[QUOTE=bitches;46917681]It's so much more complicated than 'those terrorists who will all get extinguished'. The vast majority will not even want to perform any terrorist actions, but the irritation they feel as a culture in that area will fester and cause problems with those born into it that become unstable for whatever reason people everywhere do. [editline]13th January 2015[/editline] You just said "Nuh uh!". I offered you an explanation as to why brute force does not work, and you tell me that there is only brute force. You say that others have proven to not work, but you evidently have no idea what you're talking about in terms of history. [/QUOTE] Your explanation holds no more water than mine. Your explanation is simply "brute force doesn't work because it's brute force". Brute force doesn't work against oppressed people, unless you eridicate them all. But brute force works really good against terrorists and individuals that will not accept your "peaceful" measures no matter how you try. There are some people you can't negotiate with, period. Misunderstanding of this is the source of all US problems in the Middle East, I think it's a good example.
[QUOTE=MuffinZerg;46917674]There is only one way to fight terrorists - the mossaad way. Others have proven to not work unless you have a better idelogoy to offer to people then terrorists( usually you don't ).[/QUOTE] How about integration, freedom to practice their religion, and tolerance? Seems to have worked just fine with american Muslims (not the converts from prison)
China doesn't fuck around.
[QUOTE=Sableye;46917955]How about integration, freedom to practice their religion, and tolerance? Seems to have worked just fine with american Muslims (not the converts from prison)[/QUOTE] The ones that integrate are not terrorists. It's not like every muslim is a terrorist. Burkas got banned and rightfully so: it's actually a part of the real integration. If you want to integrate into a multicultural society you have to accept the non-religious law as the regular of everything. Otherwise there will be arguements about which religious law is the regulating one. Why should muslims be allowed burkas in the streets, but satanists should not be allowed to sacrifise animals in the streets? It's freedom to practice religion after all, cutting these goats up is a big part of their belief. Where do we draw the line of "allowed religious thngs" and "disallowed religious things"? Like we allow burkas as an allowed thing, but condemn prosecute marriage which the Quaran allows. Terrorists can't integrate, no matter how you try. They spent years fighting that exact integration, they won't give it up no matter what happens because they are zealots.
[QUOTE=MuffinZerg;46918050]The ones that integrate are not terrorists. It's not like every muslim is a terrorist. Burkas got banned and rightfully so: it's actually a part of the real integration. If you want to integrate into a multicultural society you have to accept the non-religious law as the regular of everything. Otherwise there will be arguements about which religious law is the regulating one. Why should muslims be allowed burkas in the streets, but satanists should not be allowed to sacrifise animals in the streets? It's freedom to practice religion after all, cutting these goats up is a big part of their belief. Where do we draw the line of "allowed religious thngs" and "disallowed religious things"? Like we allow burkas as an allowed thing, but condemn prosecute marriage which the Quaran allows. Terrorists can't integrate, no matter how you try. They spent years fighting that exact integration, they won't give it up no matter what happens because they are zealots.[/QUOTE] Believing that wearing a cloth over your face = cult animal murder yeah you're totally not insane [editline]13th January 2015[/editline] is Craptasket's offer still open?
[QUOTE=bitches;46918215]Believing that wearing a cloth over your face = cult animal murder yeah you're totally not insane[/QUOTE] I never said it's equal. However, how do you define how to treat which aspect? How do you define "other over face" is not equal to "animal murder", while in both religions both aspects are absolutely important (hence they are equal because to be a true follower of each religion you have to obey these rules equally). Hope you get what I mean. There is no way to measure which is the more important religious/traditional thing and which is less important. We can only define which is within our laws and which is not.
I define it by that one causes the traumatic killing of a creature with no logical purpose, and the other is cloth over a face. What is wrong with you?
[QUOTE=bitches;46918376]I define it by that one causes the traumatic killing of a creature with no logical purpose, and the other is cloth over a face. What is wrong with you?[/QUOTE] You fail to understand there are other perspectives besides your one. To satanists "traumatic killing" is a vital part of their life and not traumatic killing without logical purporse. To them it has purporse, it's important, but you support restricting their freedoms. At the same time you don't support an equal case of restricting freedoms in a different religion. It shocks me that you didn't say "We can't allow public sacrifices due to sanitation reasons" or one of a dozen of other really [b]valid and logical[/b] arguements that really show why it has to be banned. Instead to refer to an abstract, non-objective, self absorbed perspective of "traumatic killings" being wrong. Face it, you don't live in China, nor you are a muslim, nor anyone involved in the problem. [b]You have no right to apply [i]your[/i] morality to [i]their[/i] situation./b] Because they don't think the same way as you do, not one time. Not one side of that issue thinks the same way you do, nor they do have the same morality as you. So you can't decide for them following your moral compas only. Burka has no logical purporse, but it's important too, as part of a culture. It's only meaning is symbolical, because if they just wanted to protect their mouths they would just use regular medical masks. So, your moral code aside, where do we draw the line of what religious things we can ban and what religious things we can't ban?
[QUOTE=MuffinZerg;46918735]You fail to understand there are other perspectives besides your one. To satanists "traumatic killing" is a vital part of their life and not traumatic killing without logical purporse. To them it has purporse, it's important, but you support restricting their freedoms. At the same time you don't support an equal case of restricting freedoms in a different religion. It shocks me that you didn't say "We can't allow public sacrifices due to sanitation reasons" or one of a dozen of other really [b]valid and logical[/b] arguements that really show why it has to be banned. Instead to refer to an abstract, non-objective, self absorbed perspective of "traumatic killings" being wrong. Face it, you don't live in China, nor you are a muslim, nor anyone involved in the problem. [b]You have no right to apply [i]your[/i] morality to [i]their[/i] situation./b] Because they don't think the same way as you do, not one time. Not one side of that issue thinks the same way you do, nor they do have the same morality as you. So you can't decide for them following your moral compas only. Burka has no logical purporse, but it's important too, as part of a culture. It's only meaning is symbolical, because if they just wanted to protect their mouths they would just use regular medical masks. So, your moral code aside, where do we draw the line of what religious things we can ban and what religious things we can't ban?[/QUOTE] The flaw with your comparison is that one side of it involves the butchering of living creatures, and the other involves wearing a harmless piece of clothing. I also find it very ironic that you would lecture about the importance of accepting alternative perspectives and cultural norms while simultaneously arguing to outlaw the expression of those cultures. [editline]13th January 2015[/editline] [I]"Fur is murder," Joseph preaches, as he rips the skin off an endangered tiger for a rug.[/I]
[QUOTE=MuffinZerg;46918735]You fail to understand there are other perspectives besides your one. To satanists "traumatic killing" is a vital part of their life and not traumatic killing without logical purporse. To them it has purporse, it's important, but you support restricting their freedoms.[/QUOTE] mmm you are going to have to use different example In the future because satanism in general is very fractured and have very big differences so you cannot group them all together. The sects or types that do would be no different than [URL="http://www.gotquestions.org/living-sacrifice.html"]Christians that did that as well[/URL]. Though we get what your trying to say. Just pointing that out.
[QUOTE=Unit-05;46919043]mmm you are going to have to use different example because satanism in general is very fractured and have very big differences so you cannot group them all together. The sects or types that do would be no different than [URL="http://www.gotquestions.org/living-sacrifice.html"]Christians that did that as well[/URL]. Though we get what your trying to say. Just sayin though.[/QUOTE] That's probably a bad example, but I just wanted to illustrate that it's very hard to define what is bannable and what isn't. [editline]13th January 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Big Dumb American;46918996]The flaw with your comparison is that one side of it involves the butchering of living creatures, and the other involves wearing a harmless piece of clothing. I also find it very ironic that you would lecture about the importance of accepting alternative perspectives and cultural norms while simultaneously arguing to outlaw the expression of those cultures. [editline]13th January 2015[/editline] [I]"Fur is murder," Joseph preaches, as he rips the skin off an endangered tiger for a rug.[/I][/QUOTE] I think if Chinese ban it they have reasons to it. I am not arguing to outlaw it, I am not really educated enough on China (let's wait for Deng to say his word). I am just saying that it's not "boiling point" of a civil war and that it will draw out the extremists, for good. But I can see burkas being the same problem as hijabs worn in public. On one hand if it's banned solely because Chinese gov wants to oppress muslims then it's bad, but I can see their reasoning. If they don't want Islam to spread in their country that's exactly what they need to do. On another hand if it's what Chinese people want then it's totally okay.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.