Islamist terrorist attack in Berlin Pride event(www.dw.com)

16 pointsby sajithdilshan5 hours ago4 comments

bfffatjb2 hours ago
Wow, HN is on one with this post.
First off, the headline is being heavily editorialized here, rather than using the headline from the article: "Germany classifies Berlin Pride ramming as 'terror attack'"
Then there are immediate accusations in the thread that this is the fault of a very broad group of people.
But equally wild is a comment opening on a tragedy with "lol". I cannot fathom what's funny here, even tragically.
Then there's someone claiming it's a false flag, when the individual suspected was previously arrested and ordered to undergo deradicalization.
Maybe we can all chill a bit, let some facts come to light and in the mean time focus on recognizing and supporting the victims?
Y'all aren't out here expressing any thoughts like, "it's fucking tough as hell for the queer community right now, and this isn't helping" or "my heart goes out to everyone who was hurt, lost someone, or witnessed that"?
No? Immediately to pointing fingers at someone?
Do better.
- sajithdilshan2 hours ago
  > First off, the headline is being heavily editorialized here, rather than using the headline from the article: "Germany classifies Berlin Pride ramming as 'terror attack'"
  Title is not edited. The German interior minister has announced it as an Islamist terror attack. https://x.com/dw_politics/status/2081381153773097041
  - bfffatjb2 hours ago
    Germany classifies Berlin Pride ramming as 'terror attack'
    That's the title of the linked article. Stop trying to gaslight folks.
    From the site guidelines: "Otherwise please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize."
    If you want the title to be a tweet, link to the tweet. But you've linked to an article, it should use the articles title.
    sajithdilshan2 hours ago
    Nope, it's a live page. DW keeps on changing the title. Also how is it Gaslighting? the fact remains the same.
- GenerocUsername2 hours ago
  You do better and stop deflecting direct attributable harm as something to hide and cover up to prevent indirect harm.
  - bfffatjb2 hours ago
    Maybe we should think of the victims and give it a couple days before deciding what the root cause is isn't deflecting anything. It's common sense, it's de escalating the instinctive desire to lash out at others when hurt. It's part of being an well regulated adult.
    sajithdilshan2 hours ago
    de-escalation doesn't change the facts. It was announced as an islamist terrorist attack as of now and it would still be an islamist terrorist attack even after 10 days.
- thomasjeff126 minutes ago
  How would otherwise you would raise billions of dollars to send to Israel to target and kill Muslims?
  Also HN has become and may be run by a right wing white supremacists now. I dare them to post pictures of people running the platform.
vcryan3 hours ago
[flagged]
- GenerocUsername2 hours ago
  Lack of incentive? How about their religion commands it? And that's why it is specifically categorized as Islamic terror rather than generic terror.
thomasjeff13 hours ago
[flagged]
khaledh3 hours ago
Had it been the other way around, it wouldn't be called a terrorist attack. Examples:
- Munich Olympia Shopping Mall Shooting (2016); classified as "amok run" (rampage) triggered by severe personal bullying and psychological distress.
- Magdeburg Christmas Market Car Attack (2024); classified as "rampage".
- Courtroom Murder of Marwa El-Sherbini (2009) in front of the judge and her 3 year old son; labelled as isolated, localized courtroom security failure.
- ImJamal2 hours ago
  There are plenty of Islamic terrorist attacks not referred to as terrorism by the media.
  The 2009 Fort Hood attack and the 2015 Chattanooga shooting are good examples.
- indiangenz3 hours ago
  It hardly ever the other way around. Its no secret that Islamists are responsible for most of the terror attacks in Germany and Europe, and here you are justifying terrorists. There is a reason why China does what it does ;-)
  - khaledh3 hours ago
    That's factually false.
    US CSIS data says attacks by non-Islamists account for 85% of total attacks, while attacks by Islamists is just 15%.
    In Europe, Europol TE-SAT data says it's 59% by non-Islamists vs. 41% by Islamists.
    Also, I'm not justifying this attack. I'm pointing out the double-standards.
    throwawaypath17 minutes ago
    >US CSIS data says attacks by non-Islamists account for 85% of total attacks, while attacks by Islamists is just 15%.
    "What is per capita?"
    GenerocUsername2 hours ago
    Now do per capita and see that their rate of terror is 10x what it should be. (And that's before readjusting for the undercategorized events being purposefully NOT counted for cultural sympethies)
    x3ro2 hours ago
    There is an additional aspect to these statistics. Eg a guy set fire to a house last year in Germany, killing four people of turkish descent. They found plenty of nazi paraphernalia in his house, but it was concluded that there was no “right-wing extremist motivation”. So there is a big question of skewed statistics underpinning all of these discussions.