Jump to content

Talk:List of Islamist terrorist attacks

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 79.161.39.98 (talk) at 07:12, 31 May 2017 (→‎Semi-protected edit request on 31 May 2017: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Semi-protected edit request on 18 April 2017

I would like to request the general update of the article. More specificly the inclusion of the terror attack in Stockholm this april year 2017. 212.181.114.61 (talk) 10:03, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with the 2017 Stockholm attack is one of ongoing police investigation. Rakhmat Akilov is "suspected on probable cause of terrorist crimes through murder". This is legal jargon which stops short of saying that investigators have assigned a motive at the current time. It is another example of a vehicle-ramming attack which can be conducted without direction from a terrorist organization. Like Khalid Masood in the 2017 Westminster attack, Akilov was known to have links to extremism but was not considered to be a major player.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 11:26, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Two comments

  1. By definition (Geneva Conventions), military installations and members of armed forces in active service are legitimate targets for enemy action and calling them "terrorist attacks" has more to do with propaganda than with law. It would be good to screen the list and discuss attacks where the target was a military installation or personnel (Lee Rigby, etc.).
  2. It would be desirable - although unsure if doable - to differentiate between religiously motivated acts of terror and the politically motivated ones. For example, the majority of attacks linked to the Kashmir conflict are unrelated to any Islamist ideology but have been carried out as the region's 70 years old struggle for independence. Similar situation may be in other contexts. To give an example, we don't list terror attacks by the Irish Republican Army under "Catholic terrorism", do we? — kashmiri TALK 09:18, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
While I agree with you, Kashmiri, and have argued in the past that suicide bombings in Afghanistan have more to do with on-going political conflict between two armed groups in that country than with "Islamism", the bottom line is that Wikipedia's policy against original research does not allow us to make such determinations on our own. We must rely on what reliable sources say, and if they describe an incident as an Islamist terrorist attack, we consider it an Islamist terrorist attack. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 18:30, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Malik Shabazz: I agree in principle, althouth we do always have a choice between quoting Fox News and, say, The Guardian. We can also try to be even more ambitious and quote proper legal analyses in specialist (legal) journals... — kashmiri TALK 23:02, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Once again, Kashmiri, I agree with you, and when they elect me king of the encyclopedia that's how we'll do things. In the meantime, we all have to comply with the policies and guidelines that are in place.
As you know, the newspapers run on a very rapid news cycle and the journals publish whenever they publish. Historians and other scholars are rarely in a hurry. but Wikipedia editors seem to be. A look at the history of the list shows that within hours of an incident anywhere in the world, whether or not it has been labeled "terrorism" and frequently before authorities have had the opportunity to investigate the motivation, editors rush to add it to the list. Certainly if later scholarly analysis were to change the initial conclusions, we would change it, but I'm not aware of that happening. Yet. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 03:51, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That's precisely why we have are expected to avoid WP:PRIMARY sources, like news reports. I have been editing for years and sort of know how WP works. Just I'd like to see more caution about certain sensitive topics (like, linking religion and terrorism). — kashmiri TALK 08:54, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Disagree, Kashmiri, Lee Rigby was not a legitimate military target. The attack on random soldier had no military objective except terrorism (and treason and murder).Yohananw (talk) 07:25, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of Islamist terrorist attacks. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:52, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Nice attack https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Nice_attack

Miss in the list this attack which made 87 dead in Nice France!! Killy-the-frog (talk) 08:22, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It is ridiclious that some people here still they that it was an Islamic terror attack. "French Prime Minister Manuel Valls was quoted in the Le Journal du Dimanche newspaper as saying investigators believe Bouhlel was somehow “radicalized very quickly.” ". I hope we don't need to argue about what radicalized means.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jul/17/mohamed-lahouaiej-bouhlel-nice-truck-attacker-was-/ --78.35.118.191 (talk) 22:58, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Be careful in your wording. It's not an Islamic terror attack, it's an Islamist terror attack. Huge difference. But today, almost a year later, it's pretty much talked of and written of, as being an Islamist terrorist attack... except in this article. But we go by consensus of editors here at wikipedia which is fair and square. Fyunck(click) (talk) 07:03, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Re The Nice truck attack - You make a false dichotomy between Islamist and Islamic, Fyunck(click). What is called islamism, or Islamic radical supremacist fundamentalism, jihadism, salafism, is self-evidently a part of Islam. Nuances about how widespread, when introduced, where condoned, are matters of research. But your agenda to whitewash their large overlap and rollback all edits is reportable vandalism.Yohananw (talk) 08:36, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure what you are referring to with "your agenda." I have no agenda so your vandalism statement is just balderdash. As far as your false dichotomy I just go by standard definitions. Islamic - relating to Islam. Islamist - an advocate or supporter of Islamic militancy or fundamentalism. This article is about Islamist terrorist attacks, not Islamic terrorist attacks. Fyunck(click) (talk) 09:58, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
This discussion is getting of track. Holland himself called it an act of Islamic terrorism. http://www.lemonde.fr/politique/article/2016/07/15/attentat-de-nice-les-responsables-politiques-entre-emotion-et-colere_4969928_823448.html --Arcadius Romanus (talk) 19:36, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

2017 Manchester attack

Manchester was obviously a terror attack and ISIL claimed responsibility. They never claim responsibility for things they did not do. It's like many other attacks listed here. Also, this topic, as it is connected to ISIL, is subject to 1RR Legacypac (talk) 15:54, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Re this edit: I'm sorry if it looks like 1RR, but it simply isn't supported by the sourcing that this attack was the work of ISIL. As per usual, it is WP:PRIMARY coming from them, and the reliable news sourcing says that the claim is unverified at the moment. At the risk of dragging in Godwin's law, you might just as well listen to Joseph Goebbels as listen to the propaganda department of ISIL. They are full of sh!t and will claim responsibility for anything to get publicity. As usual with this article, it *isn't* an Islamist terrorist attack unless reliable sources such as the investigators say that it was, which in this case they haven't. The British police investigation is ongoing, and they are playing their cards very close to their chest.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 16:19, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly. We can't use WP:SYNTH to connect "Manchester was obviously a terror attack" + "ISIL claimed responsibility" = Islamist terror attack. Also, we need to have a prominent edit notice at the top of this article to that effect, because this is not the first time that someone has jumped the gun.- MrX 16:28, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Like this one, which has appeared above the edit box for more than two years whenever anybody edits the article and informs editors about the applicability of WP:V and WP:IRS and the need for reliable sources that describe an attack as both terrorist and Islamist, and warns them that unreferenced list items may be removed? An edit notice like that? Good luck getting editors to pay attention. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 03:07, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, something like that would work very nicely—or so you would think.- MrX 03:21, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You would think so, wouldn't you. Who was it who described man (i.e., human beings) as the thinking animal? LOL — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 04:02, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The default position in this article is to wait for a talk page consensus before adding new examples. Otherwise, we just go round in circles having the same arguments over and over again. Let's get some fresh eyes on this.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 16:32, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
This is rapidly becoming Nice attack mark two. I don't think it is in much dispute that fringe Islamist politics was the root cause of the Manchester attack, but the investigators have not said this, and an official investigation could take months before all of the details are published.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 05:27, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You know, you wrote "The default position in this article is to wait for a talk page consensus before adding new examples." But there is nothing per Wikipedia rules that says any such thing. In fact, assuming you have sources to back you up, it says to be bold. To force an editor to not add something till 50 people agree with him is flat out wrong. There are sources for this being an islamist terrorist attack. Could those sources be proven wrong in the future?...of course. A year from now new "sourced" info could come forth that changes minds. In that case we'll change the article since we do have that flexibility. Fyunck(click) (talk) 05:42, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I've said before that the "List of" format of this article is causing more problems than it solves. It encourages WP:OR and WP:SYNTH to a high degree, and we end up going round in circles.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 06:08, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You're mistaken, Fyunck, about Wikipedia's "default position". When material is challenged, it is the responsibility of the editor wishing to add it to build consensus for its inclusion. See WP:ONUS.
Also, if this is such an open-and-shut case, why doesn't 2017 Manchester Arena bombing describe the bombing as Islamist terrorism? Why isn't that article in any categories related to Islamist terrorism? This list should follow the facts as described in the article, not establish its own "facts". (This is true of every incident that has its own Wikipedia article, not just this one.) — MShabazz Talk/Stalk 11:29, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I am not mistaken about the default position. If an edit is challenged, sure you try and build consensus. However that is not what was said at all. There was no parameter about "if challenged." There was simply the statement about not adding new examples until discussed, and that is not true anywhere on Wikipedia. And this list doesn't need to follow any other article. Heck, the 2016 Nice attack article says in the lead that it was Islamic terrorism, yet we don't follow that article. If it can be sourced that it was an Islamist attack then it can be added. Fyunck(click) (talk) 18:53, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You are mistaken about 2016 Nice attack. The lead says "the prosecutor for the Public Ministry ... said the attack bore the hallmarks of jihadist terrorism" (my emphasis) and that the French president "called the attack an act of Islamic terrorism". Unfortunately, "bearing the hallmarks" of something doesn't make it that thing (ask somebody who resembles Denzel Washington if he is Denzel Washington) and a politician's speech is not a reliable source for facts. That article, too, does not attribute any motive for the attack and is not included in any categories related to Islamist terrorism. Again, if these cases are so open-and-shut, what do you know that dozens of other Wikipedia editors don't? that hundreds, if not thousands, of newspaper reporters and editors don't? — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 01:01, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Then we have a HUGE disagreement on what is a reliable source of information. The President of France saying it was Islamic terrorism is good enough for most any wikipedia article. And "thousands of newspaper reporters" is such a ridiculous statement, I'm shocked you'd even say it. Fyunck(click) (talk) 05:38, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oh really? Since when have politicians become reliable sources for facts? If it's a fact, why is it attributed like an opinion? And again, if it's such an open-and-shut case, why doesn't the article state as a fact that the attack was motivated by Islamism, and why isn't it in any of the relevant categories? (Hint: Because it hasn't been established that it was an Islamist terrorist attack.) — MShabazz Talk/Stalk 10:38, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes really. When the president of France tells you it's Islamic terrorism it means a great deal. But seemingly not to you. But it doesn't matter if it's the President of France, Reuters News Service, The Hindu Times, The Chicago Tribune, The Straits Times, Manitoba news columnist Spencer Fernando, Yahoo News, or France 24. The list goes on and on. It is considered an act of Islamist terrorism. When newspapers talk of the more than 230 people killed by Islamist terrorism in France in the past couple years, the Nice Bastille Day attack is always included. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:41, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Manchester Arena Attack Research

Inasmuch as several editors have so kindly asked for clarification on how the Manchester Bombing meets this article's inclusion criteria of "Terror attacks by Islamist extremists to further a perceived Islamic religious or political cause have occurred globally", I here provide the following additional sources and notes which are much too lengthy to include in the article page itself. Note that the main article for 2017 Manchester Arena bombing already has 75 references and is still growing rapidly. Some of this material is cited in the main article, so I'm not sure how this article contradicts the other article. Feel free to add more when available:

  1. Salman Abedi was a known Islamist Extremist (from the main Wiki article) "He was known to British security services but was not regarded as a high risk.[1] A community worker told the BBC he had called a hotline five years before the bombing to warn police about Abedi's views and members of Britain’s Libyan diaspora said they had "warned authorities for years" about Manchester's Islamist radicalisation.[2][3]
  2. Salman Abedi was obsessed with the Quran as described by co-worshippers at the Didsbury Mosque. [4] "He didn't seem to like bad words being said about ISIS. It is clear he was radicalized".
  3. Bomber was part of a larger ISIS network. Abedi's 23-year-old brother Ismael was arrested in Chorlton-cum-Hardy in south Manchester in relation to the attack.[5][6] Police carried out operations[clarification needed] in two other areas of south Manchester and another address in the Whalley Range area.[6] Three other men were arrested, and police talked about a likely "network" supporting the bomber.[2]
  4. Britain raises Terror Threat to maximum level "Critical". They would only do this if they thought that they were dealing with a larger network.
  5. Travel to Libya, Germany and Syrian training camps. [7]
  6. Libyan ISIS Arrests - Hashem Abedi, 18, who lives in Libya, has reportedly been arrested by a Tripoli militia, which suspects him of Isis links[8]. Italian authorities mention the very recent contacts between the brothers as part of their evidence for doing this.
  7. Ariana Grande concert was a prime Islamist Extremist Target (religiously motivated purpose) - Mubin Shaikh, a former extremist, believes ISIS viewed the attack as a kind of perverted "PR opportunity." "To hit a den of immorality, as ISIS acolytes are calling it, it's a great target for them," he said. "Ariana Grande is a big name brand; the media will descend on it. Children being killed will get coverage, and that emotional reaction. So, all these things are hitting at the same time at the same place."[9]
  8. Sophisticated bomb-making skills point to organized terror - Terror experts said the type of bomb used in Monday night's attack - which left 22 dead - points the finger towards a sophisticated explosives-making operation. Former Scotland Yard counter-terror officer David Videcette said: "It sounds likely to have been a device carried in a bag containing a tub with chemicals and then surrounded by nuts, bolts and nails to cause the maximum amount of damage. Such devices are extremely difficult to get right.
  9. Libyan authorities call this an ISIS terror attack - citing the brother's interaction.(See #6 above).
  10. French authorities call it ISIS terror attack - [10]
  11. British investigators call it ISIS terror attack - "Investigators believe Abedi was part of a larger Isis-inspired terror network" [11] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Coriantumr15 (talk • contribs) 03:31, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "Manchester Arena attacker named by police as Salman Ramadan Abedi". The Guardian. 23 May 2017. Retrieved 23 May 2017.
  2. ^ a b "Manchester attack: Police hunt 'network' behind bomber". BBC News. 24 May 2017. Retrieved 24 May 2017.
  3. ^ Stephen, Chris (24 May 2017). "Libyans in UK 'warned about Manchester radicalisation for years'". The Guardian. Retrieved 25 May 2017.
  4. ^ RollingStone
  5. ^ Simpson, Fiona (23 May 2017). "Manchester attack: Bombing suspect named as Salman Abedi, police confirm". Evening Standard. London. Retrieved 23 May 2017.
  6. ^ a b Jones, Sam; Haddou, Leila; Bounds, Andrew (23 May 2017). "Manchester suicide bomber named as 22-year-old from city". Financial Times. Retrieved 23 May 2017.
  7. ^ https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3648069/manchester-bomber-salman-abedi-terror-attack-plot-latest/ TheSun]
  8. ^ The Guardian
  9. ^ AOL News
  10. ^ The Sun
  11. ^ The Independent

Your reading and logic skills are very poor (being "part of a larger Isis-inspired terror network"[1] does not make the bombing an "ISIS terror attack" by a long shot), but if that's what British investigators are saying, then I withdraw my objection to including the Manchester bombing in the list. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 03:48, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence to Exclude Manchester Event

Please list here any specific definitive references showing that this is not an Islamist Extremist attack for religiously motivated purposes: — Preceding unsigned comment added by Coriantumr15 (talk • contribs) 02:54, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  1. The lack of a single reliable source in which an authority describes the bombing as an Islamist terrorist attack, as required by Wikipedia's policies requiring verifiability and prohibiting original research. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 03:18, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 25 May 2017

Elpadron (talk) 14:15, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Closing; empty request. st170e 16:41, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 26 May 2017

{{subst:trim|


Please include the following in the list of Islamic terror attacks:. ref>Another wicked edit page

On 22 March 2017, a terrorist attack took place in the vicinity of the Palace of Westminster in London, seat of the British Parliament. The attacker, 52-year-old Briton Khalid Masood, drove a car into pedestrians on the pavement along the south side of Westminster Bridge and Bridge Street, injuring more than 50 people, four of them fatally. After the car crashed into the perimeter fence of the Palace grounds, Masood abandoned it and ran into New Palace Yard where he fatally stabbed an unarmed police officer. He was then shot by an armed police officer and died at the scene.

Semi-protected edit request on 27 May 2017

Please add to the list: Year: 2017 Location: Turkey Date: January 1, 2017 Description: ISIS claimed responsibility for the attack perpetrated by Abdulkadir Masharipov using an AK-47 rifle at the Reina nightclub during the New Year celebration in Istambul. Deaths: 39 Injured: 70

Sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Istanbul_nightclub_shooting http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-38673154 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-38481521 Ricardokramer (talk) 04:51, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 28 May 2017

The terrorist attach on Westminster referenced here appears to be missing from your list

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Westminster_attack 2A02:C7F:643B:C400:6881:219C:1468:E9B0 (talk) 21:38, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 31 May 2017

Why aren't the Islamist terrorist attack in Sweeden from 7. april 2017 on this list?

Source: 

"Gärningsmannens iskalla manöver med lastbilen vid attacken". Expressen (in Swedish). Retrieved 2017-04-13.

Jump up ^ "570 meter av ren skräck - DN.SE". DN.SE (in Swedish). 2017-04-08. Retrieved 2017-04-13. Jump up ^ "Woman injured in Stockholm attack dies in hospital - Radio Sweden". Sveriges Radio. Retrieved 2017-04-28. ^ Jump up to: a b "Uzbek suspect in Swedish attack sympathized with Islamic State: police". Reuters. 10 April 2017. Retrieved 12 April 2017. ^ Jump up to: a b c "Uzbekistan says told West that Stockholm attack suspect was IS recruit". Reuters. 14 April 2017. Retrieved 17 April 2017. Jump up ^ "Tragedin i Stockholms city idag". Spendrups Bryggeri AB (in Swedish). Retrieved 9 April 2017. Jump up ^ Keyton, David; Olsen, Jan M. (7 April 2017). "4 killed in Stockholm truck attack described as terrorism". AP News. Retrieved 7 April 2017. Jump up ^ "Briton among four killed in Stockholm terror attack". The Telegraph. Retrieved 9 April 2017. Jump up ^ "Swedish store hit by truck regrets 'damaged goods' promotion". Associated Press. 9 April 2017. Retrieved 9 April 2017. ^ Jump up to: a b "'Homemade bomb' found in lorry used in Stockholm attack". The Independent. 8 April 2017. Retrieved 8 April 2017. Jump up ^ "Spotify Executive Chris Bevington Dies in Stockholm Attack". Variety. 9 April 2017. Retrieved 10 April 2017. Jump up ^ "Belgian psychologist who worked with failed asylum seekers among Stockholm terror victims". Daily Telegraph. 10 April 2017. Retrieved 10 April 2017. Jump up ^ Hvittfeldt, Elisabet (11 April 2017). "Lena, 69, dödades i terrorattacken". Bohusläningen (in Swedish). Retrieved 2017-04-11. Jump up ^ "Föräldrarna till döda Ebba: "Av hela vårt hjärta tackar vi det svenska folket"". TV4 (in Swedish). Retrieved 2017-04-11. Jump up ^ Nyheter, SVT. "Politiker från Trollhättan död efter terrorattacken". svt.se (in Swedish). Retrieved 2017-04-28. Jump up ^ "Pressmeddelande: Bekräftade uppgifter om drabbade av händelsen i centrala Stockholm - Sll". www.sll.se (in Swedish). 2017-04-07. Retrieved 2017-04-28. Jump up ^ "Stockholm attack: how terrorist brought carnage to the streets of the Swedish capital". The Telegraph. Retrieved 9 April 2017. Jump up ^ "Memorial for dog killed in Stockholm attack, and Arabella Kushner serenades Chinese leader". BBC News - BBC Trending. Retrieved 12 April 2017. Jump up ^ Masters, James; Sanchez, Ray (7 April 2017). "Stockholm truck attack kills 4; arrest made". CNN. Retrieved 7 April 2017. ^ Jump up to: a b c "Four confirmed dead, one arrested over suspected terror attack". Sveriges Radio. Retrieved 7 April 2017. Jump up ^ "Löfven: "Våra fiender är de avskyvärda mördarna"". Omni (in Swedish). Retrieved 9 April 2017. Jump up ^ TT. "Löfven: "Våra fiender är de avskyvärda mördarna"". Svenska Dagbladet (in Swedish). Retrieved 9 April 2017. Jump up ^ "Uttalande av H.M. Konungen med anledning av dagens händelse i Stockholm – Sveriges Kungahus". kungahuset.se (in Swedish). Retrieved 9 April 2017. Jump up ^ "Läkaren: "Folk ställde verkligen upp"". Aftonbladet. Retrieved 9 April 2017. "Läkaren rusade från operationen mot Drottninggatan - DN.SE". DN.SE (in Swedish). 2017-04-09. Retrieved 2017-04-28. Treijs, Erica. "Hjältarna under terrorattacken". SvD.se (in Swedish). Retrieved 2017-04-28. "Läkaren Louis hjälpte terrorattackens offer: "När jag kom hem blev jag väldigt rörd"". Expressen (in Swedish). Retrieved 2017-04-28. Jump up ^ TT. ""Väldigt känslosamt" att flytta blommorna". Svenska Dagbladet. Retrieved 9 April 2017. Jump up ^ Sundkvist, Frida. "Här är bilden som sprids över världen". Svenska Dagbladet. Retrieved 9 April 2017. Jump up ^ "Norwegian-Swedish border tightened after Stockholm attack". The Local. 8 April 2017. Jump up ^ "Lastbil in i folkmassa – detta vet vi – DN.SE". Dagens Nyheter (in Swedish). 7 April 2017. Retrieved 9 April 2017. Jump up ^ Anderson, Christina; Selsoe Sorensen, Martin (7 April 2017). "Stockholm Truck Attack Kills 4; Terrorism Is Suspected". The New York Times. Retrieved 7 April 2017. Jump up ^ "Norway police destroy suspect device in Oslo". The Local. Agence France-Presse. 9 April 2017. ^ Jump up to: a b "PST: Sannsynlig med terrorangrep i Norge de neste to månedene" (in Norwegian). NRK. 9 April 2017. Jump up ^ "Tre unge menn fra Vadsø koblet til ekstrem islam på tre år. Idrettsleder kritiserer kommunens integreringsarbeid.". Aftenposten (in Norwegian). 10 April 2017. Jump up ^ Fouche, Gwaldys (7 April 2017). "Norway police to carry weapons at Oslo airport and main cities after Stockholm attack". Reuters. Retrieved 8 April 2017. Jump up ^ Heba Habib; Griff Witte (9 April 2017). "Swedish police say Stockholm truck-attack suspect was failed Uzbek asylum-seeker". Washington Post. Retrieved 9 April 2017. Jump up ^ "Lovefest organizer: We wanted to repond to terror with love - Radio Sweden". Sveriges Radio. Retrieved 2017-04-14. Jump up ^ "Så hedrar Sverige offren efter fredagens lastbilsattack". breakit.se. Retrieved 9 April 2017. Jump up ^ "Live-rapportering: Offren två svenskar, en britt och en belgare". hbl.fi. Retrieved 9 April 2017. Jump up ^ "Här hedras offren för terrorattacken med ett hav av blommor". nyheter24.se. 9 April 2017. Retrieved 9 April 2017. Jump up ^ "Göteborgarna visade sitt stöd". Göteborgs-Posten. Retrieved 9 April 2017. Jump up ^ Franchell, Eva (10 April 2017). "Rensa Stockholm - stoppa bilarna". Aftonbladet (in Swedish). Retrieved 13 April 2017. Jump up ^ "Åhléns ber om ursäkt – blir ingen rea – DN.SE". Dagens Nyheter. 9 April 2017. Retrieved 9 April 2017. ^ Jump up to: a b "Så utnyttjas attacken i Stockholm för att sprida propaganda i sociala medier - DN.SE". DN.SE (in Swedish). 9 April 2017. Retrieved 9 April 2017. Jump up ^ "Rustam, 38, hängdes ut som misstänkta 39-åringen – utan belägg". Metro (in Swedish). Retrieved 9 April 2017. Jump up ^ "Facebook vägrar ta bort bild på dödsoffer". Aftonbladet (in Swedish). Retrieved 12 April 2017. Jump up ^ "Facebook lovar radera foton på terrorns offer". Dagens Nyheter (in Swedish). Retrieved 12 April 2017. Jump up ^ Herreria, Carla (8 April 2017). "Eiffel Tower Goes Dark To Mourn Victims of Stockholm Attack". The Huffington Post. Retrieved 9 April 2017. Jump up ^ "Svenska flaggan på halv stång i Nice". Aftonbladet (in Swedish). Retrieved 9 April 2017. Jump up ^ "Merkel: Våra tankar är hos befolkningen i Stockholm". Dagens industri. 7 April 2017. Retrieved 9 April 2017. Jump up ^ "Statement attributable to the Spokesman for the Secretary-General on Attack in Stockholm, Sweden 79.161.39.98 (talk) 07:12, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_Islamist_terrorist_attacks&oldid=783118496"