52 killed, over 300 hurt in Sri Lankan Blasts

And of course this had to happen one day after the 20th anniversary of the Columbine massacre.

School Massacre Archives wrote:

And of course this had to happen one day after the 20th anniversary of the Columbine massacre.

Fuckin' April, man.

N/A

A terrorist attack in a non-white 3rd world country? Like anyone is actually going to care.

N/A

I think it has nothing to do with skin colour or religion. It is simply that as they are not occidental we feel that it is culturally remote from us. Maybe I am the only one with a bad memory but I don't remember the 2017 Sinai mosque attack and yet 311 people were killed.

G4145 wrote:

Tommy QTR wrote:

A terrorist attack in a non-white 3rd world country? Like anyone is actually going to care.

The only reason people won't care is because Christians were targeted.

Four times as many people have been killed as opposed to Christchurch, but because it doesn't fit the EVUL ANTI-MOSLUM CHRISTCHUN agenda, it won't receive nearly as much outrage.

The reason no one cares is Because it happened in a non white 3rd world country, if this happened in Europe and the victims were white, the media would be all over it. Also this attack was most likely committed by Tamil separatists.

N/A

G4145 wrote:

Tommy QTR wrote:

G4145 wrote:

Tommy QTR wrote:

A terrorist attack in a non-white 3rd world country? Like anyone is actually going to care.

The only reason people won't care is because Christians were targeted.

Four times as many people have been killed as opposed to Christchurch, but because it doesn't fit the EVUL ANTI-MOSLUM CHRISTCHUN agenda, it won't receive nearly as much outrage.

The reason no one cares is Because it happened in a non white 3rd world country, if this happened in Europe and the victims were white, the media would be all over it. Also this attack was most likely committed by Tamil separatists.

Oh, really? It was committed by Tamil separatists?

I would never have guessed that they were the perpetrators!

I said they were the most likely perpetrators, Sri Lanka has a violent history with them trying to achieve their own state.

N/A

date is ironic

Tamil separatists are always the cause of anything that goes wrong in Sri Lanka

Tommy QTR wrote:

G4145 wrote:

Tommy QTR wrote:

A terrorist attack in a non-white 3rd world country? Like anyone is actually going to care.

The only reason people won't care is because Christians were targeted.

Four times as many people have been killed as opposed to Christchurch, but because it doesn't fit the EVUL ANTI-MOSLUM CHRISTCHUN agenda, it won't receive nearly as much outrage.

The reason no one cares is Because it happened in a non white 3rd world country, if this happened in Europe and the victims were white, the media would be all over it. Also this attack was most likely committed by Tamil separatists.

The media is all over this though, it's literally headline news right now lol. And I have a feeling this was likely an Islamic attack tbh given the target choice and date

Mh_12rm_66 wrote:

Tommy QTR wrote:

G4145 wrote:

Tommy QTR wrote:

A terrorist attack in a non-white 3rd world country? Like anyone is actually going to care.

The only reason people won't care is because Christians were targeted.

Four times as many people have been killed as opposed to Christchurch, but because it doesn't fit the EVUL ANTI-MOSLUM CHRISTCHUN agenda, it won't receive nearly as much outrage.

The reason no one cares is Because it happened in a non white 3rd world country, if this happened in Europe and the victims were white, the media would be all over it. Also this attack was most likely committed by Tamil separatists.

The media is all over this though, it's literally headline news right now lol. And I have a feeling this was likely an Islamic attack tbh given the target choice and date

Really? Because it stopped trending on twitter hours ago and was barely mentioned on BBC News. There have been zero Islamic terror attacks in Sri Lanka while there have been dozens of suicide bombings committed by Tamil Nationalists, so I think who's going to be the most likely suspect here.

Tommy QTR wrote:

Mh_12rm_66 wrote:

Tommy QTR wrote:

G4145 wrote:

Tommy QTR wrote:

A terrorist attack in a non-white 3rd world country? Like anyone is actually going to care.

The only reason people won't care is because Christians were targeted.

Four times as many people have been killed as opposed to Christchurch, but because it doesn't fit the EVUL ANTI-MOSLUM CHRISTCHUN agenda, it won't receive nearly as much outrage.

The reason no one cares is Because it happened in a non white 3rd world country, if this happened in Europe and the victims were white, the media would be all over it. Also this attack was most likely committed by Tamil separatists.

The media is all over this though, it's literally headline news right now lol. And I have a feeling this was likely an Islamic attack tbh given the target choice and date

Really? Because it stopped trending on twitter hours ago and was barely mentioned on BBC News. There have been zero Islamic terror attacks in Sri Lanka while there have been dozens of suicide bombings committed by Tamil Nationalists, so I think who's going to be the most likely suspect here.

It was on the headlines for most of the major news outlets in the US and other countries and on their Youtube channels. And also pretty much all the terrorist attacks by Tamil nationalists in Sri Lanka were during the civil war. Apparently this was the first major attack since the war ended and also intelligence services had been repeatedly warned about the risk of Islamic extremism in the country in the past few weeks so I wouldn't be surprised if it was committed by NTJ (a radical group in Sri Lanka) or inspired by ISIS or another major Islamic terrorist group. Targeting churches and hotels frequented by westerners is much much more the profile of Islamic extremism than LTTE attacks if you look at the history of attacks committed LTTE. Also I wouldn't say that it's "barely mentioned on BBC" given this is their website literally right now.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Mh_12rm_66 wrote:

Tommy QTR wrote:

Mh_12rm_66 wrote:

Tommy QTR wrote:

G4145 wrote:

Tommy QTR wrote:

A terrorist attack in a non-white 3rd world country? Like anyone is actually going to care.

The only reason people won't care is because Christians were targeted.

Four times as many people have been killed as opposed to Christchurch, but because it doesn't fit the EVUL ANTI-MOSLUM CHRISTCHUN agenda, it won't receive nearly as much outrage.

The reason no one cares is Because it happened in a non white 3rd world country, if this happened in Europe and the victims were white, the media would be all over it. Also this attack was most likely committed by Tamil separatists.

The media is all over this though, it's literally headline news right now lol. And I have a feeling this was likely an Islamic attack tbh given the target choice and date

Really? Because it stopped trending on twitter hours ago and was barely mentioned on BBC News. There have been zero Islamic terror attacks in Sri Lanka while there have been dozens of suicide bombings committed by Tamil Nationalists, so I think who's going to be the most likely suspect here.

It was on the headlines for most of the major news outlets in the US and other countries and on their Youtube channels. And also pretty much all the terrorist attacks by Tamil nationalists in Sri Lanka were during the civil war. Apparently this was the first major attack since the war ended and also intelligence services had been repeatedly warned about the risk of Islamic extremism in the country in the past few weeks so I wouldn't be surprised if it was committed by NTJ (a radical group in Sri Lanka) or inspired by ISIS or another major Islamic terrorist group. Targeting churches and hotels frequented by westerners is much much more the profile of Islamic extremism than LTTE attacks if you look at the history of attacks committed LTTE.

Can you name one attack in Sri Lanka committed by Islamic extremists? Because I can name several done by the LTTE. And Sri Lanka has a very small Muslim population so the chance of them being radicalised and committing an attack. I'm not talking about the website, I meant the actual news broadcast on television because on that, the bombing got less than 5 minutes coverage while if it happened in Europe, it would take up the whole programme.

Tommy QTR wrote:

Mh_12rm_66 wrote:

Tommy QTR wrote:

Mh_12rm_66 wrote:

Tommy QTR wrote:

G4145 wrote:

Tommy QTR wrote:

A terrorist attack in a non-white 3rd world country? Like anyone is actually going to care.

The only reason people won't care is because Christians were targeted.

Four times as many people have been killed as opposed to Christchurch, but because it doesn't fit the EVUL ANTI-MOSLUM CHRISTCHUN agenda, it won't receive nearly as much outrage.

The reason no one cares is Because it happened in a non white 3rd world country, if this happened in Europe and the victims were white, the media would be all over it. Also this attack was most likely committed by Tamil separatists.

The media is all over this though, it's literally headline news right now lol. And I have a feeling this was likely an Islamic attack tbh given the target choice and date

Really? Because it stopped trending on twitter hours ago and was barely mentioned on BBC News. There have been zero Islamic terror attacks in Sri Lanka while there have been dozens of suicide bombings committed by Tamil Nationalists, so I think who's going to be the most likely suspect here.

It was on the headlines for most of the major news outlets in the US and other countries and on their Youtube channels. And also pretty much all the terrorist attacks by Tamil nationalists in Sri Lanka were during the civil war. Apparently this was the first major attack since the war ended and also intelligence services had been repeatedly warned about the risk of Islamic extremism in the country in the past few weeks so I wouldn't be surprised if it was committed by NTJ (a radical group in Sri Lanka) or inspired by ISIS or another major Islamic terrorist group. Targeting churches and hotels frequented by westerners is much much more the profile of Islamic extremism than LTTE attacks if you look at the history of attacks committed LTTE.

Can you name one attack in Sri Lanka committed by Islamic extremists? Because I can name several done by the LTTE. And Sri Lanka has a very small Muslim population so the chance of them being radicalised and committing an attack. I'm not talking about the website, I meant the actual news broadcast on television because on that, the bombing got less than 5 minutes coverage while if it happened in Europe, it would take up the whole programme.

Just because one hasn't happened doesn't mean it's impossible for it to. As they say; there's a first time for everything. Sri Lankan security services were literally warned in the past few weeks that their could be a coordinated attack against churches and other related institutions in the coming weeks committed by Islamic groups. And Islam is the third largest religion in Sri Lanka. And I'm specifically talking about a lack of LTTE attacks specifically targeting Christians and westerners not LTTE attacks in general lol. The date of the attacks and locations selected are consistent w/Islamic terrorist attacks that have occurred in other places. And you did not specify in regards to what form of news you're talking about you only said "BBC news", and besides more people get their news via the social media/news websites anyways so it supposedly only being on TV for "a few minutes" doesn't suddenly mean that they're deliberately under-covering it or whatever you are suggesting with this whole "the media doesn't care because it's in a 3rd world country" or whatever.

Mh_12rm_66 wrote:

or whatever you are suggesting with this whole "the media doesn't care because it's in a 3rd world country" or whatever.

I agree with him (edit: I meant with [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] but if we all agree on that point so much the better), let's admit it, we feel less concerned when it happens in a third world or non-occidental country. However I don't see what is wrong with it. It is normal to care more about what is close to you, either geographically or culturally. It's not that I am not sad for what happened or that I don't care that people died, but I feel less concerned about it. I would understand if they didn't care about attacks in France and I would never blame them for that.

Neah wrote:

Mh_12rm_66 wrote:

or whatever you are suggesting with this whole "the media doesn't care because it's in a 3rd world country" or whatever.

I agree with him, let's admit it, we feel less concerned when it happens in a third world or non-occidental country. However I don't see what is wrong with it. It is normal to care more about what is close to you, either geographically or culturally. It's not that I am not sad for what happened or that I don't care that people died, but I feel less concerned about it. I would understand if they didn't care about attacks in France.

Exactly, and in this case it's not even underrepresented literally all the major news outlets are running it as headline news given the scale of the tragedy. I always see people immediately jump on the whole "oh wow the media is so biased/racist because they aren't talking about this" when more often then not that is not even the case. And even if it was the case then you are absolutely right in regards to the fact that if it's a smaller event then of course it's going to be less prominent in the news for news outlets based far away from where the event happened. Like for example, the most recent mass shooting event in the U.S. (the Aurora Plant Shooting) was in the national news here in America but probably was not really in the news in other countries such as France, Japan, Germany, etc and probably not mentioned at all in smaller countries like Italy, Colombia, Vietnam, etc. but that doesn't suddenly mean that those countries outlets are deliberately not having 24/7 coverage of it because they hate the victims or whatever

Mh_12rm_66 wrote:

Neah wrote:

Mh_12rm_66 wrote:

or whatever you are suggesting with this whole "the media doesn't care because it's in a 3rd world country" or whatever.

I agree with him, let's admit it, we feel less concerned when it happens in a third world or non-occidental country. However I don't see what is wrong with it. It is normal to care more about what is close to you, either geographically or culturally. It's not that I am not sad for what happened or that I don't care that people died, but I feel less concerned about it. I would understand if they didn't care about attacks in France.

Exactly, and in this case it's not even underrepresented literally all the major news outlets are running it as headline news given the scale of the tragedy. I always see people immediately jump on the whole "oh wow the media is so biased/racist because they aren't talking about this" when more often then not that is not even the case. And even if it was the case then you are absolutely right in regards to the fact that if it's a smaller event then of course it's going to be less prominent in the news for news outlets based far away from where the event happened. Like for example, the most recent mass shooting event in the U.S. (the Aurora Plant Shooting) was in the national news here in America but probably was not really in the news in other countries such as France, Japan, Germany, etc and probably not mentioned at all in smaller countries like Italy, Colombia, Vietnam, etc. but that doesn't suddenly mean that those countries outlets are deliberately not having 24/7 coverage of it because they hate the U.S. or whatever reason

Well I didn't watch the news in France because I am on a "news diet" but I really don't think they talked about it, or if they did it was probably very very short. But I think they should have because even if it is remote from us this was a really big attack. They didn't really reported the awful attack in Mali either, even if at least 134 people were killed, they only care about the yellow vests and Notre Dame and stopped talking about international events which I think is scandalous because many things happened. BTW, I created [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] and no-one commented on it, which probably shows that I am not the only thinking that way (and for once I really cared and was shocked to see that it was not on the news).

Neah wrote:

Mh_12rm_66 wrote:

Neah wrote:

Mh_12rm_66 wrote:

or whatever you are suggesting with this whole "the media doesn't care because it's in a 3rd world country" or whatever.

I agree with him, let's admit it, we feel less concerned when it happens in a third world or non-occidental country. However I don't see what is wrong with it. It is normal to care more about what is close to you, either geographically or culturally. It's not that I am not sad for what happened or that I don't care that people died, but I feel less concerned about it. I would understand if they didn't care about attacks in France.

Exactly, and in this case it's not even underrepresented literally all the major news outlets are running it as headline news given the scale of the tragedy. I always see people immediately jump on the whole "oh wow the media is so biased/racist because they aren't talking about this" when more often then not that is not even the case. And even if it was the case then you are absolutely right in regards to the fact that if it's a smaller event then of course it's going to be less prominent in the news for news outlets based far away from where the event happened. Like for example, the most recent mass shooting event in the U.S. (the Aurora Plant Shooting) was in the national news here in America but probably was not really in the news in other countries such as France, Japan, Germany, etc and probably not mentioned at all in smaller countries like Italy, Colombia, Vietnam, etc. but that doesn't suddenly mean that those countries outlets are deliberately not having 24/7 coverage of it because they hate the U.S. or whatever reason

Well I didn't watch the news in France because I am on a "news diet" but I really don't think they talked about it, or if they did it was probably very very short. But I think they should have because even if it is remote from us this was a really big attack. They didn't really reported the awful attack in Mali either, even if at least 134 people were killed, they only care about the yellow vests and Notre Dame and stopped talking about international events which I think is scandalous because many things happened. BTW, I created [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] and no-one commented on it, which probably shows that I am not the only thinking that way (and for once I really cared and was shocked to see that it was not on the news).

Yes I was just using France as an example country but in this case this attack is being featured prominently on a fair amount of major news networks front pages. I do agree with you that the Mali attack received less coverage (although I remember seeing it featured on Associated Press and CNN) but I think part of the reason for that was due to the fact that Mali is in a state of "quasi-war" given the ongoing insurgency (same reason why terrorist attacks in Syria or Afghanistan are not headline news in most western countries) while this event in Sri Lanka was a far less common occurrence given that there have been hardly any attacks (especially one this large) ever since the civil war ended almost a decade ago. It is common sense that something less common will attract less news attention tbh; although the locality rule still applies in this case as I guarantee African news networks covered the Mali attack more than European or American networks. I think you're thread probably received less attention also due to the fact that it was a Islamic terrorist attack as I've seen many posters here mention they find those attacks "less interesting" or "boring" compared to school/mass shootings with other motivations. I'm not talking bad about your post or anything though, I for one find Islamic Terrorism particularly interesting and it is a subject I read about often but that's just my theory on why your post maybe got less attention then something about Sandy Hook or Columbine etc.

Mh_12rm_66 wrote:

I think you're thread probably received less attention also due to the fact that it was a Islamic terrorist attack as I've seen many posters here mention they find those attacks "less interesting" or "boring" compared to school/mass shootings with other motivations. I'm not talking bad about your post or anything though, I for one find Islamic Terrorism particularly interesting and it is a subject I read about often but that's just my theory on why your post maybe got less attention then something about Sandy Hook or Columbine etc.

Don't worry, I am personally not really interested in Islamic terrorist attacks either except obviously when they happen in my country and I didn't mention my post to blame anyone and I was not offended at all that no one posted on it, it was just to show that I am not the only one feeling less concerned by remote events. But even if I agree with you that most people on this forum find islamic attacks interesting, usually attacks in Europe or in the United States get more attention. Being located in a third-world country, and I also agree with you, especially when they happen in a country where we would expect tragedies to happen, is definitely a factor for getting less attention in occidental countries.

Tommy QTR wrote:

I'm not talking about the website, I meant the actual news broadcast on television because on that, the bombing got less than 5 minutes coverage while if it happened in Europe, it would take up the whole programme.

This is wildly off topic, but I think cable news is on its way out. Most people get their news from the internet nowadays.

QuestionMark wrote:

Tommy QTR wrote:

I'm not talking about the website, I meant the actual news broadcast on television because on that, the bombing got less than 5 minutes coverage while if it happened in Europe, it would take up the whole programme.

This is wildly off topic, but I think cable news is on its way out. Most people get their news from the internet nowadays.

Absolutely

I was surprised but in fact they do talk about it on TV in France and they said it could be islamist, although for now they are not sure yet.

Hate to be an "I told you so type person" but it seems based on the new information coming out it looks like I was right. Sri Lankan government named NTJ (a local radical Islamic group) as being the perpetrators with them likely having international help from a global organization such as ISIS or Al-Qaeda. At this point I would be very very surprised if it was some other group (LTTE, radical buddhists, etc).

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Update: Last i checked the eeath toll was 321 dead. And i think it will climb dramatically more over time. I think they're going to beat Beslan. It is now confirmed the attack was in fact also revenge for christchurch.

hexagonwitch wrote:

Update: Last i checked the eeath toll was 321 dead. And i think it will climb dramatically more over time. I think they're going to beat Beslan. It is now confirmed the attack was in fact also revenge for christchurch.

Terrorism breeds terrorism.

Apparently from what I've heard, the bombings was a retaliation for the recent attack at Christchurch. If that turns out to be 100% true, then it looks like Brenton Tarrant has got what he wished for, though it may not be what he exactly had in mind.

School Massacre Archives wrote:

If that turns out to be 100% true, then it looks like Brenton Tarrant has got what he wished for, though it may not be what he exactly had in mind.

Well the victims were non white for the most part so I doubt he feels too bad.

In regards to the Chirstchurch connection, was it actually confirmed ? I saw on of the Ministers in Sri Lanka speculated that it was revenge but other than that I didn't see where he got that from (ie. from the terrorist's manifestos or something similar).

Update: Sri Lanka Easter day bombings bodycount rises to 359 dead. Now officially worse than Beslan terror attack.

Now they said it's was mistake and died 253.