Gunman opens fire at restaurant in Brussels

BREAKING NEWS: A gunman has opened fire at a restaurant in central Brussels, Belgium, reportedly using a kalashnikov. The gunman fled the scene immediately after. So far, no reports of injuries.

Yes! These peaceful murderers only use kalashnikovs against nasty hurty words that offend the religion of peace and it’s peaceful system of decapitation, stoning and crucifiction.

Not surprising. The overall problem with Islam is that is based on an incredibly totalitarian idea, since its base is that anyone who isn’t Muslim is a sinner. While it may be true that many who practice Islam adapt to the country they live in. The problem emerges when they refuse to adapt. They develop a contemptuous feelings against the country they live in and the people of that country, and both cultures become conflicted, since they are not compatible.

1 Like

Maybe you have more information than was in the article posted? I did not see where they claimed it was a Muslim?


Islam is a talmudic satanic imperialistic death cult that had an illiterate child molesting warmongering fucktard as a leader. Muslims follow the principles and practices of this idiot which is why they bring death and destruction everywhere they go.

Side note: what better system to use to enact a one world government than an Uber totalitarian socio political system backed by a perverse sorry excuse of an Abrahamic religion?

Yes - white Europeans have a long history of shooting up restaurants on Christmas Eve. :clown_face:

Come on - the Coulter Rule is in effect

1 Like

I’m not disagreeing, but there is the possibility it wasn’t a Muslim.

I’ll for the information to come out on the shooter. For all I know, it was someone fired from the restaurant right before Christmas.

There is also a possibility that the sun won’t come up tomorrow.

Compounding the problem, at least in Europe, is that a lot of nations have done a poor job of assimilating them. Instead they are marginalized on the fringes of society, breeding resentment and radicalism.

Holy shit - I about hit the damn floor reading that. These animals have essentially invaded all of Europe and now you are blaming Europeans because animals from third world shitholes don’t integrate with Western society? What kind of dopey logic is that?

When you travel to a foreign country, do you expect everyone in that foreign country to adapt to your cultural preferences and individual needs - or do you STFU and mind your manners?

1 Like

Pick yourself up off the floor and holy shit try again.

Some European nations (I’m looking at you, France and Germany, among others) allowed Islamic immigrants in, and then made little effort to assimilate them. Left to their own devices, marginalized and with little opportunity, what did they think would happen? And no, they didn’t owe it to the immigrants - they owed it to themselves. Otherwise they were better off taking the route of some Eastern European nations, and denying them entry altogether.

Actually, I think the problem is more that Islam does these three things: first it gives license to those who may want to take it upon themselves to do something about those who displease Allah; second it gives them some license to arbitrarily determine who displeases Allah; third it is NOT a religious system that deals with salvation, or with the rolling away of sins, but does grant the jihadi (the person who does those first two things) the only promise of salvation given.

I’ve heard the last put this way: that a Muslim can do all the pillars, they can pray, they can fast, they can give alms to the poor, they can memorize the Koran, they can teach the unlearned, correct the erring, they can even be a great leader … they can be Super Muslim … and Allah will still throw them into Hell. But the loser who died in Jihad is the guy what gets into paradise.

All of that is more than just saying people aren’t Muslim so they’re sinners.

So why isn’t every Muslim a raging murderer?

I would put it to you that most people aren’t really good disciples. As you indicated Muslims, a lot of them at least, want friends, want neighbors that they like, they want careers, they want civil societies where they can have all those things. Yes, ask them and they’ll say that they want Shiria etc but for many I think that’s just them saying what they think they should, it’s a hypothetical Sharia etc that they claim to want, a Sharia etc that somehow manages to give them what they already enjoy now when they really aren’t all that much when it comes to emulating Mohammad who is held out as the great example.

But the Sharia etc that a good disciple of Mohammad who seeks to emulate him wants probably isn’t so hypothetical and … squishy. And the Koran itself is all that is needed for such a Muslim to go from the squishy Islam of the culturally Muslim to the nutter shouting that Allah is greater than the Lord.

So it isn’t just saying that people who aren’t X or Y faith are sinners that is the problem. It’s what you do, or are commended to do, after that that may be.

Dammit…it’s society fault that it didn’t provide a rapist with young girls to have sex with.

1 Like

I welcome you into my home as a guest. I put food on the table, a roof over your head. Yet you choose to disrespect me and it is somehow my my fault? :face_with_raised_eyebrow:

You adopt a troubled child and then punt them into a spare bedroom and ignore them, don’t be surprised if they fail to successfully integrate into the family.

Don’t get me wrong - I think the countries denying entry altogether have the right of it. But if you’re going to make the commitment, then make it FULLY for the sake of the established population and the culture. Half-assing it is asking for trouble.

You assume quite a bit.

I put a roof over your head and food on the table. The onus is on YOU to be grateful and learn the rules if you want to live one more day under my charity. The onus is not on me to kiss your ass in anyway, shape or form.

1 Like

Apparently that is what he’s saying…never could understand their logic.

There’s a responsibility there on the part of the recipient, sure. Do you not also feel there’s responsibility on the part of the giver, for the safety of those already there and the established dynamic, to ensure the entity welcomed in is invested?

Again, to cut off the inevitable knee-jerk responses: yes, the recipient has to make an effort. But for the giver to simply sit back and expect their work ended when they opened the door is the height of irresponsibility to the rest of the family/nation. It’s not about “kissing their ass” it’s about covering your own.

Otherwise, just keep them out. That’s certainly the safer route.

No. They aren’t children and they weren’t adopted. They are invaders.

1 Like

I’m sorry, I thought we were discussing immigrants and refugees invited by the host countries. If they were invaders then they should obviously be repelled.

Thanks for clearing that up.