Terrorist attack on Istanbul nightclub - multiple wounded - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Svinnik;51607992]why would religious islamists wear a santa suit? It seems that if that part of the story is true, it's more likely to be a Kurdish attack[/QUOTE] IIRC the shooter was heard screaming "Allah Ackbar". I could be wrong, but I still find Kurdish attack less likely, especially since it's the New Years Eve which is generally "haram" according to Islamists. Even then, whoever did this is a scum. [editline]1st January 2017[/editline] Also the CIA knew about the attack and warned the club owner, I figure they would do the same for stadium bombing if they gathered intel about Kurds in the first place. I doubt they're gathering intel on them as much as they are on potential Islamists. [editline]1st January 2017[/editline] [url]http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/01/scores-dead-attack-istanbul-nightclub-170101003450788.html[/url] [quote]Al Jazeera's Sinem Koseoglu, reporting from Istanbul, said security services believe the timing and target suggest ISIL involvement.[/quote]

[QUOTE=Trebgarta;51608005]Might as well flip a coin right now with the speculation.[/QUOTE] I don't think you understand statistics. Statistically, not 50/50. Much more likely to be an Islamist terror attack.

[QUOTE=Trebgarta;51608088]It is all speculatio, as [I]meaningless [/I]as flipping a coing. Not the same odds Also: There are no statistics of such incidents Terror attacks dont form rulesets It could as well be ASALA returned from the dead, who knows aything about it Math doesnt work as you wish it would when you have so many unknowns and irregularities For starters, Santa fucking Claus[/QUOTE] Key word is could. However it would be silly to say ASALA is as likely as Islamists.

[QUOTE=yff;51607995] Because I'm positive that I remember correctly phenomena of highly educated and well off people joining these groups, I just grabbed the first result from Google. I'll continue this discussion tomorrow and cite better sources. As I said, it's almost 5 am here and FP is extremely slow, I'll respond to any new answers tomorrow.[/QUOTE] Here's the study that backs this. [url]http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/274292.php[/url]

I don't think the research in this study clashes with the second generation theory. It's obviously a multifaceted issue.

Welp.. Welcome to 2017. Nothing much will change. RIP to those who lost their lives to terrorist scum.

[QUOTE=geel9;51607978]You're not speaking to islamists right now, you're speaking with us, and WE think you're a hypocrite.[/QUOTE] No, you're not speaking for all of US.

[URL="http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-38481521"]39 are confirmed dead.[/URL] [editline]1st January 2017[/editline] [media]https://twitter.com/AJEnglish/status/815509430414364673[/media]

[QUOTE=Trebgarta;51608196] There are many sides to it, yes, [B][I]but we can all agree[/I][/B] religiousness and conservatism dont relate to terrorism I hope.[/QUOTE] I don't think we can agree.

[QUOTE=Trebgarta;51608196] There are many sides to it, yes, but we can all agree religiousness and conservatism dont relate to terrorism I hope.[/QUOTE] Uh yeah, don't all agree on that one at all.

[QUOTE=UK Bohemian;51609127]No, you're not speaking for all of US.[/QUOTE] Well then obviously you wouldn't be a part of "us".

[QUOTE=geel9;51611713]Well then obviously you wouldn't be a part of "us".[/QUOTE] Then don't write "us".

[QUOTE=!LORD M!;51611717]Then don't write "us".[/QUOTE] "us" being "the people he's having an argument with who vehemently disagree with him." This is not a difficult concept to grasp.

[QUOTE=geel9;51611721]"us" being "the people he's having an argument with who vehemently disagree with him." This is not a difficult concept to grasp.[/QUOTE] You should have been more specific then.