Sri Lanka Terror Attack LIVE: A series of eight devastating bomb blasts ripped through high-end hotels and churches holding Easter services in Sri Lanka on Sunday, killing over 180 people, including dozens of foreigners. Worshippers were targeted at the Kochikade, St Sebastian and Batticaloa churches during mass, while the other locations were Hotel Shangri La, Cinnamon Grand and Kingsbury hotel. After a few hours, two more explosions were reported in the suburb of Orugodawatta and Dehiwala.
Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe condemned the attacks — the worst act of violence since the end of Sri Lanka's civil war a decade ago — as "cowardly", and said the government was working to "contain the situation". The powerful blasts — six in quick succession and then two more hours later — wrought devastation, including at the capital's well-known St Anthony's Shrine, a historic Catholic Church.
"So far the names that have come up are local", the prime minister stated, adding that investigators would look into whether the attackers had any "overseas links".
Interesting so does that mean it was the Tamil tigers or Buddhist extremists?
It shows how Israel infiltrates Palestinian protests and bring the real Palestinians to be caught by Israeli army. False flags, use of undercover or insider agents has never been below the character of Zionists, Europeans, Hindus.
For your sake, for the sake of your fellow muslims, please remember this and don't dupe yourself into supporting "controlled opposition" extremist organizations.
I'm not telling Muslims should be liberal, pro-West bendovers. I hate Europeans, Russians, Hindus, Chinese but what we need is SMART resistance, not crazy, nutcase extremism.
Death toll has reached 310 and a massive 10th car bomb was defused by police; what were them guys thinking? Blow all of Sri Lanka up?
Yup it was the jihadi group national tawhid jamaat.
Why did they attack Christians?, revenge for newzealand attack?
Anyway thank God they've been caught!
As for New Zealand attack yet officials say that was one of their motives, but believe me the ISI/NTJ don't care about that, other than using it as recruitment tool.
If anything, I guess it's to destabilize the country, foster hatred between muslim and non-muslims. The more hatred non-muslims have and discriminate muslims, the more radical the muslims will become, possibly joining ISIS. The more they join ISIS, the more terror attacks they can carry out. It's a cycle that gets worse and worse.
Also another factor, Christians and Buddhists were at odd against each other before the attacks, now surely they will join forces to eliminate muslims from the island.
Personally I think India's RAW organized this. Sri Lanka has largely come under China's wing especially given China provides Sri Lanka with a lot of money for infrastructure investment. And these attacks will be seen as a failure of the ruling party. India can now secretly fund a far-right anti-islam extremist party to power and take control of Sri Lanka once again, while fulfilling its long-term agenda to eliminate muslims from the subcontinent.
No country has gained more from this attack than India and christian politicians. And no one lost more than the Sri Lankan muslims. They are in big, big trouble.
Last edited by CuriousonTruth; 04-23-2019 at 01:18 PM.
As for New Zealand attack yet officials say that was one of their motives, but believe me the ISI/NTJ don't care about that, other than using it as recruitment tool.
If anything, I guess it's to destabilize the country, foster hatred between muslim and non-muslims. The more hatred non-muslims have and discriminate muslims, the more radical the muslims will become, possibly joining ISIS. The more they join ISIS, the more terror attacks they can carry out. It's a cycle that gets worse and worse.
Also another factor, Christians and Buddhists were at odd against each other before the attacks, now surely they will join forces to eliminate muslims from the island.
Personally I think India's RAW organized this. Sri Lanka has largely come under China's wing especially given China provides Sri Lanka with a lot of money for infrastructure investment. And these attacks will be seen as a failure of the ruling party. India can now secretly fund a far-right anti-islam extremist party to power and take control of Sri Lanka once again, while fulfilling its long-term agenda to eliminate muslims from the subcontinent.
No country has gained more from this attack than India and christian politicians. And no one lost more than the Sri Lankan muslims. They are in big, big trouble.
No brother I think u got it wrong here.
The bhudists in sri lanka have persecuted the Muslims in 2018 and 5 years ago and the police did little to stop it, so why should they target Christians worshipping in churches and having Easter dinner in hotels a few weeks after Muslims were targeted in mosques?
Christians are a minority in sri lanka and I don't think they opressed the Muslims in any way so the only thing that makes sense is that it was retaliation for newzealand attacks
The bhudists in sri lanka have persecuted the Muslims in 2018 and 5 years ago and the police did little to stop it, so why should they target Christians worshipping in churches and having Easter dinner in hotels a few weeks after Muslims were targeted in mosques?
Christians are a minority in sri lanka and I don't think they opressed the Muslims in any way so the only thing that makes sense is that it was retaliation for newzealand attacks
I honestly think they don't care. Don't forget one of the philosophies of ISIS, is that muslims who don't give them Bayah are considered as apostates. I don't think they actually care about New Zealand attacks beyond using it as recruitment tool.
And deep inside I do believe yes that India organized the attacks. They stand to gain the most from this.
I honestly think they don't care. Don't forget one of the philosophies of ISIS, is that muslims who don't give them Bayah are considered as apostates. I don't think they actually care about New Zealand attacks beyond using it as recruitment tool.
And deep inside I do believe yes that India organized the attacks. They stand to gain the most from this.
What makes you think they don't care ? I'm not saying they should show they're care by doing wrong but they've been citing oppression of Muslims for the reason of their jihad. Nothing to indicate they don't care, however their irrational acts of revenge brings more problems for Muslims!
What makes you think they don't care ? I'm not saying they should show they're care by doing wrong but they've been citing oppression of Muslims for the reason of their jihad. Nothing to indicate they don't care, however their irrational acts of revenge brings more problems for Muslims!
I read a long read on the European Jihadists long time ago during the hayday of ISIS. One of the points I remember from it is that one of the goals of ISIS is to make relations between muslims and non-muslims worse, because the more hostile the non-muslims are the more muslims they get as recruit.
And you didn't respond to the other point - they consider muslims who don't give them Bayah as Apostates, so if anything the NZ muslims were propaganda fodder to them. Remember ISIS made takfir on Yasir Qadhi and other scholars, so the NZ muslims are nothing to them.
I read a long read on the European Jihadists long time ago during the hayday of ISIS. One of the points I remember from it is that one of the goals of ISIS is to make relations between muslims and non-muslims worse, because the more hostile the non-muslims are the more muslims they get as recruit.
And you didn't respond to the other point - they consider muslims who don't give them Bayah as Apostates, so if anything the NZ muslims were propaganda fodder to them. Remember ISIS made takfir on Yasir Qadhi and other scholars, so the NZ muslims are nothing to them.
Yeah isis were absolutely nuts in their approach to solving Muslims' problems, however they tried to incite civil wars between Muslims and non-Muslims in western countries in the belief that they were the prophecised caliphate and Muslims were about to score a resounding victory over the kuffar!
I remember 1 isis guy saying in a video that once the Americans come over to Syria, their going to be defeated by isis in Dabiq ; they really thought they were the forerunners to Imam Mahdi's army
I read an interesting book recently titled "The Shia Revival", which speaks at length about the situation in Iraq after the American invasion. One point that becomes clear is that the conflict in that region was not based on Muslim vs. western (American) elements, but rather a desperate struggle for control of Iraq between the Sunni minority, and the Shia majority. For every attack on the Americans, there were 30 attacks on Shia mosques, markets, schools, etc. The whole "jihad against the crusaders" nonsense was simply a pretense that covered the real motivations (and the Shia retaliated with their own attacks in some cases).
And how groups like ISIS can even declare a legitimate Caliphate, theologically and historically speaking, is beyond me. Based on what authority?
At the end of the day, these guys are simply Kharijites, who will cause discord and chaos between any and all groups in some effort to seize power in the chaos that results. Now the focus appears to be Sri Lanka.
Uhm, what? Am I reading this correctly? Why do you hate people?
Correction: Chinese Communist Party, not whole Chinese people. Another Correction: Forgot to add Israelis
As for why, I assume you are very young or soemthing. There are geopolitical and historical reasons for that.
- - - Updated - - -
format_quote Originally Posted by Silas
I read an interesting book recently titled "The Shia Revival", which speaks at length about the situation in Iraq after the American invasion. One point that becomes clear is that the conflict in that region was not based on Muslim vs. western (American) elements, but rather a desperate struggle for control of Iraq between the Sunni minority, and the Shia majority. For every attack on the Americans, there were 30 attacks on Shia mosques, markets, schools, etc. The whole "jihad against the crusaders" nonsense was simply a pretense that covered the real motivations (and the Shia retaliated with their own attacks in some cases).
And how groups like ISIS can even declare a legitimate Caliphate, theologically and historically speaking, is beyond me. Based on what authority?
At the end of the day, these guys are simply Kharijites, who will cause discord and chaos between any and all groups in some effort to seize power in the chaos that results. Now the focus appears to be Sri Lanka.
Well they also consider the Shia pagan, which makes Shia worse than the Christian West. That's why although they exiled all the christians from Mosul, they killed the shia wherever they could.
I mean ISIS even declared Hamas, MILF (Phillipines) as being outside Islam and attacked them. They started war against the Taliban in Afghanistan (according to Taliban USA was providing weapons). They even had wars against Al-Qaeda in Yemen, Syria, etc.
So what makes you think Shias will get a free apss, when they even attack sunnis. We all forget they made entire two sunni tribes disappear.
"Based on what authority?"
According to ISIS, Al-Baghdadi is a descendant of Quraysh tribe, which makes him eligible for caliphate (NOTE: A lot of muslims especially arabs regard the Ottomans as false caliphate). Also at the time of his proclamation, there were no other caliphates. So by legal measure, they actually tick the boxes.
What makes ISIS unique is that unlike AL-Qaeda which started their popularization on anti-Imperialism and anti-West, ISIS from the start made their agenda about Caliphate, Shariah, etc instead of just opposing the West. However they really caught attention after taking Mosul and captivating the Yazidi populace.
Whereas AQ and Taliban would hide their more "crude" applications, ISIS flaunted them to the world. Unlike AQ supporters who sued to say "The media is making them look bad", ISIS supporters would say, "This is islam and shariah, and we are proud of it." Their arrogance reminds me of ISraelis and European people. ISIS are defo the European version of Islam.
And ofcourse for whatever reason, all that actually attracted muslims from the West.
Correction: Chinese Communist Party, not whole Chinese people. Another Correction: Forgot to add Israelis
As for why, I assume you are very young or soemthing. There are geopolitical and historical reasons for that.
- - - Updated - - -
Well they also consider the Shia pagan, which makes Shia worse than the Christian West. That's why although they exiled all the christians from Mosul, they killed the shia wherever they could.
I mean ISIS even declared Hamas, MILF (Phillipines) as being outside Islam and attacked them. They started war against the Taliban in Afghanistan (according to Taliban USA was providing weapons). They even had wars against Al-Qaeda in Yemen, Syria, etc.
So what makes you think Shias will get a free apss, when they even attack sunnis. We all forget they made entire two sunni tribes disappear.
"Based on what authority?"
According to ISIS, Al-Baghdadi is a descendant of Quraysh tribe, which makes him eligible for caliphate (NOTE: A lot of muslims especially arabs regard the Ottomans as false caliphate). Also at the time of his proclamation, there were no other caliphates. So by legal measure, they actually tick the boxes.
What makes ISIS unique is that unlike AL-Qaeda which started their popularization on anti-Imperialism and anti-West, ISIS from the start made their agenda about Caliphate, Shariah, etc instead of just opposing the West. However they really caught attention after taking Mosul and captivating the Yazidi populace.
Whereas AQ and Taliban would hide their more "crude" applications, ISIS flaunted them to the world. Unlike AQ supporters who sued to say "The media is making them look bad", ISIS supporters would say, "This is islam and shariah, and we are proud of it." Their arrogance reminds me of ISraelis and European people. ISIS are defo the European version of Islam.
And ofcourse for whatever reason, all that actually attracted muslims from the West.
In the west, we typically refer to the Ottomans as a Sultanate and not a Caliphate (Osman I was Turkish, not Arab). I have not studied the matter, so I cannot say one way or the other
The Muslims in the west that went to join ISIS came from radical enclaves in places like Britain and France--countries that have welcomed in radical elements and individuals who were not longer welcome in their home countries. A small number came from the US, but I can assure you that groups such as ISIS have no support where I live. The mosques here have been vocal in denouncing the group. I think many understand that ISIS pulls its ideology from select passages in the Hadiths, the actions of some of the early Caliphs, rather than from the Quran or accepted theology.
In the west, we typically refer to the Ottomans as a Sultanate and not a Caliphate (Osman I was Turkish, not Arab). I have not studied the matter, so I cannot say one way or the other
The Muslims in the west that went to join ISIS came from radical enclaves in places like Britain and France--countries that have welcomed in radical elements and individuals who were not longer welcome in their home countries. A small number came from the US, but I can assure you that groups such as ISIS have no support where I live. The mosques here have been vocal in denouncing the group. I think many understand that ISIS pulls its ideology from select passages in the Hadiths, the actions of some of the early Caliphs, rather than from the Quran or accepted theology.
After collapse of Abbasids nearly all the independent sultanates claimed to be Caliphate including the Sultanate in my country. But ofcourse no one took each other seriously. It was after Selim I conquered the Mamluks and Hejaz, that the claim of Caliphate was accepted by other sultanates.
The reasons of them joining are complex and there are many reasons. However most of their young western recruits had little knowledge of Hadiths, Creed or jurispendence.
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
Eric H liked this post
It's totally wrong.png "Emoji (19)")
; they really thought they were the forerunners to Imam Mahdi's army
:
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks