8 attacks in Sri Lanka, 200+ deaths.

  • Thread starter Dennisch
  • 50 comments
  • 2,418 views

Dennisch

Humongous member
Premium
31,104
Netherlands
Hilversum
Dennisch
At least 207 people have been killed and 450 hurt in explosions at churches and hotels in Sri Lanka, police say.
At least eight blasts were reported. Three churches in Negombo, Batticaloa and Colombo's Kochchikade district were targeted during Easter services.
The Shangri-La, Kingsbury, Cinnamon Grand and a fourth hotel, all in the capital Colombo, were also hit.
A national curfew has been put in place "until further notice" and social media networks have been temporarily blocked.
Reports say seven people have been arrested, but it not yet clear who is responsible for the attacks.

Sri Lanka's defence minister has said the attacks were probably carried out by one group.

St Sebastian's church in Negombo was severely damaged. Images on social media showed its inside, with a shattered ceiling and blood on the pews. Dozens of people are reported to have died there.
There were heavy casualties too at the site of the first blast in St Anthony's, a hugely popular shrine in Kochchikade, a district of Colombo.
Among those killed in Colombo were at least nine foreign nationals, hospital sources told the BBC.


_106538014_sri_lanka_explosions_what_happened_v1_640-nc.png


The attacks haven't been claimed but National Thowheeth Jama'ath, not very surprising a radical Islamic group, warned for attacks days before.

BBC
 
... don't jump to conclusions, it could be hinduists or budhists, who knows, right?

Isn't surprising that some people think Notre Dame fire around easter wasn't coincidence when you look how churches in France are target of vandalism and desecration when one religious group just love to target religious symbols of other faiths.
 
Last edited:
At least with an attack of this scale it will be relatively easy to identify the group(s) responsible, whether anyone claims responsibility or not.
 
Why are some politicians referring to the victims as Easter Worshippers? Does Sri Lanka not practice/recognize Christianity?
Likely the local pols are walking on eggshells trying not to say or do anything that will incite revenge/further violence. They have imposed a curfew, shut down social media and spiked as much media reports as possible pointing to the Islamic culprits. They justifiably fear massive reprisals against Muslims. There last thing they need is another civil war. Sri Lanka boasts a variety of ethnicities and religions, although maybe under the skin they tend to animism.
Ethnic groups
(2012[2])

74.9% Sinhalese
11.2% Sri Lankan Tamils
9.2% Sri Lankan Moors
4.2% Indian Tamils
0.5% Others (incl. Burghers, Malays, Veddas, Chinese, Africans)
Religion

70.2% Buddhism
12.6% Hinduism
9.7% Islam
7.4% Christianity
0.1% Other/None
 
Remember that the main reason this didn't have as much coverage (mostly in western media) as past Christchurch shooting is because one happens in Sri Lanka ("Forgettable" Third World) while one is in NZ (First Western World). It's sad, but it's the truth.

Love how quite lot of people connect to the perpetrators as the cause of the coverage difference. No, doesn't matter. The Paris "Charlie Hebdo" attack and Boston Marathon Bombing relatively has the same coverage as Christchurch shooting.

RIP for those who has died. Hell to the terrorist.
 
The mastermind?

439187



Moulvi Zahran Hashim preaches incitement. (photo credit: screenshot)


https://www.jpost.com/International...ermind-of-one-of-the-Sri-Lanka-attacks-587544

He was one of two people that various reports said were behind the suicide attacks not long after the bombings but it was probably not picked up by our media since it was unconfirmed and their involvement could have been fabricated to apportion blame to Muslims (hence the social media blackout to stop potential misinformation spreading).

We'll know soon enough.

It would be a nice gesture if whoever's in charge of the Notre Dame fund gave some of that money to those recovering from the attacks.
 
No. People are free to give their earnings to who they choose. We might not like their choices but it isn't our money.
Wait, so it wouldn't be a nice gesture??

People can give money to whatever they want, I'm saying it would be nice of the beneficiaries to make a small gesture of goodwill.
 
People can give money to whatever they want, I'm saying it would be nice of the beneficiaries to make a small gesture of goodwill.

So it's okay to give money to somebody for something but they then choose to give it to somebody else without asking you? No, it isn't. If people want to give money to any appeal in respect of this attack then they will.
 
Wait, so it wouldn't be a nice gesture??

People can give money to whatever they want, I'm saying it would be nice of the beneficiaries to make a small gesture of goodwill.
Not only would I not want money I gave to a cause to be given to another cause, even if I was inclined to donate to that as well. And frankly I wouldn't want to be given money that was supposed to go to something or someone else; it may or may not be considered so in the eyes of the law (though I suspect the former is more likely the case), but I'd sure feel as though it was stolen.

So no, I'd say it's not a nice gesture.
 
How about those African victims of the religion of peace who get blown to bits every week or so? Do they get some?
 
I knew from my heart as a Muslim that a Muslim terrorist would be responsible for this.

Because markets, churches and hotels are all fair game to them.

Im not surprised anymore that that they pick the most peaceful and easy targets to carry out this horrific acts.

In 2005 we lost a Muslim director the esteemed Mousptaha Akkad to these terrorist bastards when Al Qaeda of Iraq bombed a hotel in Jordan.

Rest in peace to the victims. The way I see it in Sri Lanka it is going to get worse because the next civil war may not be Sri Lanka vs Tamils but Buddhists vs Muslims. And the terrorists doing these acts may even cause a race riot or a civil war.
 
Back