• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Religious/Extremist Terrorism: Non-Muslim edition

I also have difficulty comparing the future to the past. I could wait until that date arrives, but then it's no longer the future but also the past.

Thanks for pointing that out. I think...

Oh well. 😶
The main purpose of this thread seems to be to highlight terrorism that can be laid at the feet of white right-wing extremists. "Non-Muslim" is a playful euphemism.
The main purpose of this thread seems to be to highlight terrorism that can be laid at the feet of white right-wing extremists. "Non-Muslim" is a playful euphemism.
One person's playful is another person's hateful, demeaning, stereotyping excuse to slip in some nudge nudge Muslim bashing.

I know this is a private forum, but there are many casual observers who do not know this to be true.

My 2 cents, probably worth even less than that. I will however take an Edmund Burke approach to this (or more correctly, John Stuart Mill)
I can't believe we have a Non-Muslim terrorism thread.

Do we have a Non-Catholic Priest Pedophile thread?

A Non-German Anti-Semitism Thread?

A Non-American Racist Thread?

What the actual fuck?

Maybe we need to check some biases....

This has been around since 2016 and you're getting worked up about it now ?
I guess we could burn Huckleberry Finn while we're at it.

I think at the time it was to show that not all terrorism was being devised by Mulims, which at the time seemed to be a default setting.
There is a much older thread called Muslim Terrorism. I think this was a split from it if I recall.
“Islamic Terrorism in the West”, started in November 2008. I think you’re right that this split off from it.
One person's playful is another person's hateful, demeaning, stereotyping excuse to slip in some nudge nudge Muslim bashing.
Not sure how this is a thread for Muslim bashing. I suppose that happens in the Islamic Terrorism thread. "Non-Muslim" implies everything else, which I also suppose is an indirect bash (ie. Muslims have their own defamation thread centred on terrorism). But "everything else" is mostly white extremists, with an occasional "other" thrown in.

I suppose if it was the '70s we could have a thread about Communist- (Russian-) sponsored terrorism.
As the person who did the split in the first place about 7 years ago, I can tell you, hand on heart, the "non-Muslim" label was only to differentiate discussion of terrorism not associated with Islamists (which is discussed here - updated as recently as last month). It was not meant as a dig, slight, poke, nudge-nudge, nothing-but-right-wing reference, nor as passive-aggressive whataboutism in response to discussion of Islamist-driven atrocities. It deals with things that aren't Muslim, so I named it "non-Muslim". I know nobody can read my heart, and that people are going to attribute what they're going to attribute no matter what I say, but I did the split as nothing more than a categorical housecleaning exercise.

We've seen anti-government activity not linked to extremist Islamists, as well as other activity by some radicalized by the incel movement, Antifa, BLM and others. Because of the differing motivations of the different streams, the already then-overwhelming majority of activity on the threads linked to radicalized Muslim terrorism, and the growing attention to other types of radicalization, I thought it would make sense pulling the non-Muslim-attributed material here. There also wasn't enough material at that point to, say, create separate Antifa, BLM, incel and other anti-government threads (although there is some discussion on the Freemen on the Land movement & activities here).

If anyone feels strongly enough that the site would be better served with discussion of the events highlighted here differently, feel free to report this to the mod squad via the usual channels. Because there appears to be at least some questions or concerns on motivation/intent, if further action is requested via the mods, I can commit to stay out of any internal discussion re: how else to deal with this range of topics.

I hope this clarifies things a bit.

Milnet.ca Staff
Last edited:
Just a thought, why not just change it to "...non-Islamist"?
But then some might not be able to signal their virtuness in public rather then "reporting" the thread to the Moderator group with their concerns.
Not just white, right wing extremists, but BLM and ANTIFA belong here also. I am bothered by the right /left spectrum analysis. It is being used to define terrorist allegiance, but just ends up capturing a whole swath of normal, non involved people based on how they vote. We are witnessing it right now with the trudeau liberals attempting to paint the whole conservative party as right wing MAGA extremists (republican Trump terrorists) using US republican operatives to guide them.
Terrorism is plain and simply the use of violence to push a point of view on others, in an attempt to coop them through fear. It doesn't even have to tied to politics, right or left, black or white. The Luddites were terrorists and their cause was against mechanization of the textile industry. The Confederate Southern Cross was the Battle Flag of the democrats (not the flag of the Confederate States). It morphed into a sign that you were from the south and proud of it. Nobody ever thought, for a second, that the Duke boys were clansmen. Then it morphed again into a lightning rod for extremists. Which is unfortunate because so many people still use it as a source of pride as a Southerner.

Muslim terrorism has one goal. The annihilation the Jews and their state. Non Muslim terrorism could be for any reason whatsoever. Fishing rights, pipelines, George Floyd. Muslim terrorism is defined. The rest isn't. Go ahead and rejig the thread titles to make them politically correct, if it bothers you that someone might be offended. However I think, both threads should stay separate. If for no other reason than clarity.

Just my 2 cents
Last edited by a moderator:

A ruling that will likely set some precedence.
Five concurrent life sentences, minimum 25 years before eligibility for parole. That doesn’t mean parole will necessarily ever be granted.
And in other news

In 2007, Pickton was convicted of six counts of second-degree murder and sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of full parole for 25 years. The remains or DNA of 33 women were found on his pig farm in Port Coquitlam, around 25 kilometres east of downtown Vancouver.

The serial killer becomes eligible to apply for day parole — meaning he would have to return to prison or a halfway home at night — on Feb. 22, according to the Parole Board of Canada.

Pickton will be eligible for full parole in 2027.

My, how time flies.