Religion and Ethics Forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: Bubbles on June 19, 2017, 03:13:14 AM
-
Finsbury Park Mosque: 'Several hurt' as van hits pedestrians
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-40322960
::)
What?
It Isn't saying what that's about, but I am guessing it's a copy cat retaliating sort of attack.
It's Muslims hurt this time, on the way to prayers.
What is the matter with people?
How does stooping to the level of others ( as in terrorist nutters) and killing even more innocent people, help? Or prove anything?
They have arrested someone.
Update:
Apparently he was yelling " Muslims where are all the Muslims? I wanna kill Muslims!"
I hope they don't just dismiss him as mentally ill, because he's a terrorist too.
I think that could cause more unrest.
-
One of the real, underlying problems here is that the Jihardis have invented a terror weapon which is available to practically everybody - whatever their philosophy.
-
Another sick and evil tragedy. >:(
-
Finsbury Park Mosque: 'Several hurt' as van hits pedestrians
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-40322960
::)
What?
It Isn't saying what that's about, but I am guessing it's a copy cat retaliating sort of attack.
It's Muslims hurt this time, on the way to prayers.
What is the matter with people?
How does stooping to the level of others ( as in terrorist nutters) and killing even more innocent people, help? Or prove anything?
They have arrested someone.
Update:
Apparently he was yelling " Muslims where are all the Muslims? I wanna kill Muslims!"
I hope they don't just dismiss him as mentally ill, because he's a terrorist too.
I think that could cause more unrest.
Is the man a Muslim or is he part of any terrorist group.
Till we know speculation needs to stop as he is only suspected of being a terrorist.
If he is mentally ill he is very different from terrorist and you cannot lump all murders under one heading.
It is terrible such a thing has happened. It was terrible when real terrorist killed our people on the bridge.
It was terrible when they flew planes full of people into buildings. Terrorist are killing innocent people and we cannot
expect the relatives or those hurt by such acts not to kick out. Two wrongs never make a right.
I wish all this killing and harming others would end. But that was the reason for terrorist attacks to undermine the security of people and make them turn on each other. We have to refrain from doing evil and from retaliation.
In all cases this not any different to our children in Manchester who were murdered in their own home town for doing nothing wrong.
This could be retaliation but Manchester wasn't and the two are not mutually the same. But both equally horrifying and unacceptable in todays society.
Divide and conquer... that is what they are using and who knows if this attack was not pact and parcel of a bigger plan.
We have to hope that peace will come and that the Government will give counseling to families who have been devastated to
stop revenge killings.
-
Even if the guy is mentally ill it is not an excuse, what he has done is WRONG, >:( he should be incarcerated for a very long time.
-
Even if the guy is mentally ill it is not an excuse, what he has done is WRONG, >:( he should be incarcerated for a very long time.
Sorry, I believe that, if this chap was indeed suffering from mental illness, he needs to be treated in a secure environment, assessed as to whether the treatment is effectibve, and then put into either a secure hospital or general prison.
It's a lot more complicated than that.
(Mind you if he's found to be part of the extreme right, then a whole life sentence is the order of the day.....)
-
Is the man a Muslim or is he part of any terrorist group.
Till we know speculation needs to stop as he is only suspected of being a terrorist.
If he is mentally ill he is very different from terrorist and you cannot lump all murders under one heading.
It is terrible such a thing has happened. It was terrible when real terrorist killed our people on the bridge.
It was terrible when they flew planes full of people into buildings. Terrorist are killing innocent people and we cannot
expect the relatives or those hurt by such acts not to kick out. Two wrongs never make a right.
I wish all this killing and harming others would end. But that was the reason for terrorist attacks to undermine the security of people and make them turn on each other. We have to refrain from doing evil and from retaliation.
In all cases this not any different to our children in Manchester who were murdered in their own home town for doing nothing wrong.
This could be retaliation but Manchester wasn't and the two are not mutually the same. But both equally horrifying and unacceptable in todays society.
Divide and conquer... that is what they are using and who knows if this attack was not pact and parcel of a bigger plan.
We have to hope that peace will come and that the Government will give counseling to families who have been devastated to
stop revenge killings.
You don't have to be a Muslim or a signed up member of a group to be a terrorist.
Anyone can be a terrorist, all you need is the intention to spread fear that stops people going about their daily lives.
If someone who calls themselves a Muslim who has read things by Islamic extreme groups which caused them to act by driving into crowds is a terrorist, then it follows that if some white joe blogs non Muslim reads extremist literature about immigrants or Muslims which causes them to act in the same way, then both are terrorists.
To claim one is a terrorist while the other is mentally ill, would be a double standard.
One that most Muslims won't miss, and it will cause trouble and bad feeling.
I doubt if this person driving his van into Muslims is a relative of the victims of past attacks, but if you excuse him in any way for that, what about those Muslims who have family abroad killed by bombs from "the west" ?
Does the distance of loved ones really make a difference?
Should they be excused in part too?
I think we have to do some soul searching here, to make sure we are fair in the way we treat Muslims and non Muslims who attack in this way.
-
Apparently the van was hired in Wales. Probably not even a Londoner.
Every now and then I glance at the comments on Yahoo news (don't ask me why) and the anti Muslim bile on there is staggering. Hate is very real. Most wankers who perpetuate this shit will never shift off their sofas long enough to do any physical harm, but they stoke the flames for the inadequate nut jobs that will.
I'm struck over and over by the pathetic nose picking wankery of these people. Like Newsthump says, the suicide terrorists get disappointed in heaven to find that their promised virgins are more terrorists. Of any kind.
-
Very sad of course....but I am afraid this kind of thing is likely to continue. Attack...counter attack...counter counter attack....and so on! It builds on!
I wouldn't be surprised if some Britishers (Europeans?) join together to form some kind of a counter terrorist group. Maybe they already have.
Just being Chweet and flowery doesn't always help. We have to be realistic too sometimes.
-
Very sad of course....but I am afraid this kind of thing is likely to continue. Attack...counter attack...counter counter attack....and so on! It builds on!
I wouldn't be surprised if some Britishers (Europeans?) join together to form some kind of a counter terrorist group. Maybe they already have.
Like the security services and the police, you mean?
-
Far from Theresa May fan but that was a pretty good speech on this.
-
Far from Theresa May fan but that was a pretty good speech on this.
Yep. Just listening to it too - well said.
-
ALL terrorists are mentally ill.!!!
-
No they aren't.
As an aside I'm getting tired of 'he must be mentally ill' getting trotted out after each atrocity.
-
ALL terrorists are mentally ill.!!!
... which, even if true (I don't think so), is hardly good news for an already stigmatised group.
-
No they aren't.
As an aside I'm getting tired of 'he must be mentally ill' getting trotted out after each atrocity.
No doubt to some it's more palatable than "Actually some people are just King Cnuts."
-
ALL terrorists are mentally ill.!!!
Are they? Including Nelson Mandela?
-
... which, even if true (I don't think so), is hardly good news for an already stigmatised group.
And exposes the ludicrous way in which anxiety, depression, PTSD, anorexia et al get lumped in with the vanishingly rare forms of dangerous psychopathy. It's like putting a common cold and a broken leg in the same category as Ebola.
Just a reminder - many of our first responders involved in Grenfell will be left 'mentally ill' because of what they have witnessed.
-
We need to define exactly what a terrorist is.
Not just a person or group that inspires terror either.
-
If you like. 'Mentally ill' isn't a defining characteristic of 'terrorist' though.
-
We need to define exactly what a terrorist is.
Not just a person or group that inspires terror either.
Has someone suggested that? How does this link in with your assertion that all terrorists are mentally ill?
-
Answer the question & stop,as bloody usual, avoiding it !!!
-
Apparently the van was hired in Wales. Probably not even a Londoner.
Every now and then I glance at the comments on Yahoo news (don't ask me why) and the anti Muslim bile on there is staggering. Hate is very real. Most wankers who perpetuate this shit will never shift off their sofas long enough to do any physical harm, but they stoke the flames for the inadequate nut jobs that will.
I'm struck over and over by the pathetic nose picking wankery of these people. Like Newsthump says, the suicide terrorists get disappointed in heaven to find that their promised virgins are more terrorists. Of any kind.
Good post!
-
We need to define exactly what a terrorist is.
Not just a person or group that inspires terror either.
I think it's very difficult to do that. You can see this by looking at Middle East reactions to Western violence, where the US and the UK are often denounced as terrorist states. I suppose some people object to this, as it is not an individual act of violence. Of course, they also object because 'our' violence is good, and 'their' violence is bad.
Incidentally, Scott Atran, the anthropologist, has interviewed many terrorists, and argues that they are not mentally ill in the main (his book is 'Talking to the Enemy').
-
Answer the question & stop,as bloody usual, avoiding it !!!
Maybe ask a question first. Your's doesn't have one.
-
Terrorist
A person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.
‘four commercial aircraft were hijacked by terrorists’
‘a suspected terrorist’
The debatable bit is the " unlawful" bit.
Assuming ALL attacks on civilians by individuals is terrorism, regardless of if you agree with principals fought for or not.
Countries don't really qualify, but it can be difficult because countries are made up of individuals who sometimes are indistinguishable because they use those tactics and supporters in the same way.
In this way, all the people using vans to run people over, are terrorists.
-
Apparently the van was hired in Wales. Probably not even a Londoner.
Every now and then I glance at the comments on Yahoo news (don't ask me why) and the anti Muslim bile on there is staggering. Hate is very real. Most wankers who perpetuate this shit will never shift off their sofas long enough to do any physical harm, but they stoke the flames for the inadequate nut jobs that will.
I'm struck over and over by the pathetic nose picking wankery of these people. Like Newsthump says, the suicide terrorists get disappointed in heaven to find that their promised virgins are more terrorists. Of any kind.
I see no reason for him to be a Londoner at all.
London is just a target because it's the capital, just about everyone has heard of it.
It doesn't mean Londoners have a tendency for terrorism.
I never intended the title to imply it had something to do with the character of Londoners.
???
-
According to at least two witnesses on BBC there was more than just this one man in the van.
If so, why isn't it being reported and the police looking for the other two?
It seems a bit odd.
Apart from the two witnesses it seems to be being overlooked.
???
I know witnesses sometimes get it wrong, but two separate witnesses? There is no mention of others ( terrorists)being involved in the investigation. :o
Finsbury attack: 'Muslims don't feel safe'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40324279
Finsbury Park attack: 'He was shouting, I want to kill all Muslims'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-40323698
Shouldn't the police be looking for the others?
According to the independent.
"The force said it had found nothing to confirm witness reports that up to three men had been in the van before two fled, or that the driver was carrying a knife and stabbed victims."
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/van-pedestrians-hit-run-over-casualties-latest-police-finsbury-park-mosque-muslims-seven-sisters-a7796551.html
Seriously?
What did it require to confirm there were more people in the van?
Video footage?
Says about it here too, but the police seem to dismiss it.
https://www.ft.com/content/2a02510a-548b-11e7-80b6-9bfa4c1f83d2
Seems odd perhaps the video that was shot only showed one, not sure.
-
Do Muslims who are homosexual or women fear for their lives in this country as they do their own?
We see the usual daft arguments but the facts are there should not be any religion or terrorist group attacking the Citizens of the UK
in their own country or demanding their laws to be allowed in practice here.
Whatever the reason... ALL THESE KILLINGS HOWEVER DONE ARE WRONG.
Arguing about the 'why's' and 'wherefore's' won't change these facts.
-
Rose
Thanks for that great insight. :)
Sass
Then what do you suggest?
Nick
-
Apparently the van was hired in Wales. Probably not even a Londoner.
Every now and then I glance at the comments on Yahoo news (don't ask me why) and the anti Muslim bile on there is staggering. Hate is very real. Most wankers who perpetuate this shit will never shift off their sofas long enough to do any physical harm, but they stoke the flames for the inadequate nut jobs that will.
I'm struck over and over by the pathetic nose picking wankery of these people. Like Newsthump says, the suicide terrorists get disappointed in heaven to find that their promised virgins are more terrorists. Of any kind.
I see what you're saying but also find it understandable that there is a level of anger and will be a dislike for those carrying out murderous attacks which have been continuing on and off for over 16 years.
-
According to at least two witnesses on BBC there was more than just this one man in the van.
If so, why isn't it being reported and the police looking for the other two?
It seems a bit odd.
Apart from the two witnesses it seems to be being overlooked.
???
I know witnesses sometimes get it wrong, but two separate witnesses? There is no mention of others ( terrorists)being involved in the investigation. :o
Finsbury attack: 'Muslims don't feel safe'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40324279
Finsbury Park attack: 'He was shouting, I want to kill all Muslims'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-40323698
Shouldn't the police be looking for the others?
According to the independent.
"The force said it had found nothing to confirm witness reports that up to three men had been in the van before two fled, or that the driver was carrying a knife and stabbed victims."
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/van-pedestrians-hit-run-over-casualties-latest-police-finsbury-park-mosque-muslims-seven-sisters-a7796551.html
Seriously?
What did it require to confirm there were more people in the van?
Video footage?
Says about it here too, but the police seem to dismiss it.
https://www.ft.com/content/2a02510a-548b-11e7-80b6-9bfa4c1f83d2
Seems odd perhaps the video that was shot only showed one, not sure.
If it's on the BBC then it is being reported. And yes, two separate witnesses can make a similar mistake. Note that you then assume it as fact , when you say 'Shouldn't the police be looking for the others?', means you are dismissing all the other witnesses who say there was only one person. Why would you assume that the vast majority of the witnesses and the video footage and the statements of the police are wrong?
-
I see what you're saying but also find it understandable that there is a level of anger and will be a dislike for those carrying out murderous attacks which have been continuing on and off for over 16 years.
Anger and dislike for those who carry out murderous attacks is entirely understandable. Futile, ultimately, but understandable.
Unfortunately what we're seeing from a lot of not very bright people (and goodness knows there's no shortage of those) is anger, dislike and worse of those who share an ethnic background and/or religion with those who carry out such attacks. I draw your attention to the Finsbury Park tragedy.
-
Yes.... it's very sad.
-
I see what you're saying but also find it understandable that there is a level of anger and will be a dislike for those carrying out murderous attacks which have been continuing on and off for over 16 years.
There is nothing understandable about attacking innocent people! :o
-
I see what you're saying but also find it understandable that there is a level of anger and will be a dislike for those carrying out murderous attacks which have been continuing on and off for over 16 years.
I dislike terrorists. I don't see what that has to do with anti Muslim sentiment.
-
There is nothing understandable about attacking innocent people! :o
This is a remarkably stupid comment.
Unless we try to understand why this happens we will never move forward.
It's as if our supplying arms to Saudi Arabia is a totally separate issue. They use those arms to bomb the Yemen - but that's nothing to do with our lily white hands. No blood here. These arms are being supplied by British companies with the full support of the UK government and most of the country seem unaware that some of the hostility and consequences we face are due to our making money out of death.
The people in the Yemen who have been killed are every bit as innocent as victims here, but do we recognize that?
No we don't. We carry on making money.
Grubby, dirty, death-inflicting money. It's an absolute disgrace, and the kind of shallow thinking displayed on this thread by some posters makes me shudder.
-
This is a remarkably stupid comment.
Unless we try to understand why this happens we will never move forward.
It's as if our supplying arms to Saudi Arabia is a totally separate issue. They use those arms to bomb the Yemen - but that's nothing to do with our lily white hands. No blood here. These arms are being supplied by British companies with the full support of the UK government and most of the country seem unaware that some of the hostility and consequences we face are due to our making money out of death.
The people in the Yemen who have been killed are every bit as innocent as victims here, but do we recognize that?
No we don't. We carry on making money.
Grubby, dirty, death-inflicting money. It's an absolute disgrace, and the kind of shallow thinking displayed on this thread by some posters makes me shudder.
I stand by my comment!
-
I stand by my comment!
In which case we will never make any progress. I think you may be mistaking 'understanding' for 'excusing'.
-
Trent & Rose, thank you for very good posts, i like the way you express things.
sassy good to see you! Wondered where you were.
You said - Do Muslims who are homosexual or women fear for their lives in this country as they do their own?
For many Muslims, Sassy, this is their country, they know no other!
-
In which case we will never make any progress. I think you may be mistaking 'understanding' for 'excusing'.
When people say that although it is wrong they understand, why someone would wish to harm all Muslims, in spite of the terrible crimes being perpetrated by extremists, it almost makes it acceptable to cause them harm, imo. It is as bad as claiming it is understandable for some to brand all homosexuals as paedophiles, just because some have sex with children.
-
???
Homosexuls don't have sex with children, paedophiles do.
-
???
Homosexuls don't have sex with children, paedophiles do.
Some homosexuals have sex with kids, as do heterosexuals. However, when it comes to paedophilia I have, times without number, seen anti-gay bigots blame them for that crime. :o
-
When people say that although it is wrong they understand, why someone would wish to harm all Muslims, in spite of the terrible crimes being perpetrated by extremists, it almost makes it acceptable to cause them harm, imo. It is as bad as claiming it is understandable for some to brand all homosexuals as paedophiles, just because some have sex with children.
I am saying you have to understand what motivates people to act in the way they do. If you don't, you stand not a snowball in hells chance of changing anything. If you understand the motivations of terrorists you can perhaps, and I grant you it is only perhaps, change the situation. But trying to change the situation is surely better than a blank 'they are all disgusting' response that I see here all too frequently without thinking through the consequences of our actions as a country.
-
I am saying you have to understand what motivates people to act in the way they do. If you don't, you stand not a snowball in hells chance of changing anything. If you understand the motivations of terrorists you can perhaps, and I grant you it is only perhaps, change the situation. But trying to change the situation is surely better than a blank 'they are all disgusting' response that I see here all too frequently without thinking through the consequences of our actions as a country.
I understand the motivation of ISIS terrorists who have been brainwashed into doing what they think Allah requires of them. I understand the motivation of those of the extreme far right 'little Englander' mentality, who want to see an all white Britain. But understanding what makes these evil people tick isn't going to change anything, imo.
-
Some homosexuals have sex with kids, as do heterosexuals. However, when it comes to paedophilia I have, times without number, seen anti-gay bigots blame them for that crime. :o
No they don't! People who have sex with children whether their own sex,opposite sex or both, are paedophiles. Blow what anti-gay bigotssay, they;re wrong.
Homosexuals and heterosexuals prefer adult company.
I understand the motivation of ISIS terrorists who have been brainwashed into doing what they think Allah requires of them. I understand the motivation of those of the extreme far right 'little Englander' mentality, who want to see an all white Britain. But understanding what makes these evil people tick isn't going to change anything, imo.
I don't know about that floo. Understanding the mentality/way of thinking is helpful in bringing about change. It takes a long time & not an exact science but is worth doing. No-one can negotiate with someone brainwashed into an ideal without understanding them and treating the issues that brought them to that place seriously. That includes acknowledging faults of those they propose to attack.
-
When people say that although it is wrong they understand, why someone would wish to harm all Muslims, in spite of the terrible crimes being perpetrated by extremists, it almost makes it acceptable to cause them harm, imo. It is as bad as claiming it is understandable for some to brand all homosexuals as paedophiles, just because some have sex with children.
Floo, you misunderstood what I meant. Sorry, if my post was not clear. I meant it is not surprising there is some backlash from some folk regards the terrorists. But some will say they dislike all Muslims because of the bad behaviour of a minority. It's how some people are, fortunately not everyone.
-
No they don't! People who have sex with children whether their own sex,opposite sex or both, are paedophiles. Blow what anti-gay bigotssay, they;re wrong.
Homosexuals and heterosexuals prefer adult company.
I don't know about that floo. Understanding the mentality/way of thinking is helpful in bringing about change. It takes a long time & not an exact science but is worth doing. No-one can negotiate with someone brainwashed into an ideal without understanding them and treating the issues that brought them to that place seriously. That includes acknowledging faults of those they propose to attack.
Of course anti-gay bigots are WRONG, did I say they weren't? ::)
-
Floo, you misunderstood what I meant. Sorry, if my post was not clear. I meant it is not surprising there is some backlash from some folk regards the terrorists. But some will say they dislike all Muslims because of the bad behaviour of a minority. It's how some people are, fortunately not everyone.
Sadly it might not be surprising if some blame all Muslims for the evil terrorists attacks, it doesn't mean the mind set of those who do in understandable/excusable.
-
I understand the motivation of ISIS terrorists who have been brainwashed into doing what they think Allah requires of them. I understand the motivation of those of the extreme far right 'little Englander' mentality, who want to see an all white Britain. But understanding what makes these evil people tick isn't going to change anything, imo.
So are we condemned to this terrorism forever or do you have another alternative?
Or are you going to stock with your disgusting/sick/perverted/animal line and think that outraged commenrs will somehow win the day?
-
So are we condemned to this terrorism forever or do you have another alternative?
Or are you going to stock with your disgusting/sick/perverted/animal line and think that outraged commenrs will somehow win the day?
I just don't understand what you are on about, or why you seem to have it in for me? I suggest if I really upset you so very much you ignore my posts.
-
He's just asking for alternatives, no-one's got it in for anyone from what I see.
Of course anti-gay bigots are WRONG, did I say they weren't? ::)
No you didn't & I didn't say you did :o.
If I'd said - "and we all know what the blooming bigots think don't we floo", you might have got it (tho' don't think I was that unclear, I type badly on this laptop).
We misunderstand eachother's post sometimes i think.
(Maybe lots of times :D.)
-
He's just asking for alternatives, no-one's got it in for anyone from what I see.
No you didn't & I didn't say you did :o.
If I'd said - "and we all know what the blooming bigots think don't we floo", you might have got it (tho' don't think I was that unclear, I type badly on this laptop).
We misunderstand eachother's post sometimes i think.
(Maybe lots of times :D.)
If you say so.
-
Charming!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-40347813
-
I just don't understand what you are on about, or why you seem to have it in for me? I suggest if I really upset you so very much you ignore my posts.
Clearly you don't understand what I am on about.
Let me try one more time. Western governments including our very own, have for years supported regimes that to put it bluntly are run by nasty, sadistic, butchering bastards. We, who collectively vote for our governments are, each of us, in some small part responsible for that state of affairs. That people who are bombed out of their homes by said butchering bastards and tortured, and have their families ripped apart feel to put it mildly, a bit fucking miffed. They then look around and think where are these butchering bastards getting all their weapons from - oh look the USA or the UK. It is then no big surprise to me that there is a payback involved. That the payback comes from various directions because of the way hatred seeps through the cracks of communities should also be no big surprise. So although our recent spate of terrorists were homegrown they were fed by fertilizer that was spread over the ground in the form of bombs in areas of the Middle East.
To not even contemplate that there are reasons for terrorists to act, no matter how twisted their logic is, is lazy thinking born of an assumed privilige and feeling of innate superiority that really has no basis in actual fact.
-
Please may I copy and use that (paraphrased) in conversation? You've put it quite concisely, I'm impressed (not a-crawling i assure you)!
-
Rose
Thanks for that great insight. :)
Sass
Then what do you suggest?
Nick
Our laws have to protect our people and our way of life.
-
Our laws have to protect our people and our way of life.
What's our way of life? Who's "our" people?
It's constantly changing, what was our way of life in the 1950's isn't now.
Even our food and drink has changed enormously, due to outside influences.
Are we supposed to freeze " our way of life" to 2017?
Plus we are all different, my Sunday is very different to my ordained Christians friends "way of life".
A Muslims week is different again, who are we protecting? My ordained Christians friends over a Muslims way?
The only thing we need to protect is our freedom, and unfortunately we are losing that anyway.
With freedom comes the risk of losing your "way of life".
Freedom is what happened to Sunday Trading, look at it now.
Freedom doesn't go hand in hand with " preserving our way of life"
To me " our people" includes Muslims and ethnic groups and their way of life too.
What does it mean to you Sassy?
Basically white and Christian?
-
Please may I copy and use that (paraphrased) in conversation? You've put it quite concisely, I'm impressed (not a-crawling i assure you)!
You can - but my post was fairly simplistic just to get the point over. The reality of the situation is much more horrifyingly complex (of course) and you would need to write a book (probably in several volumes) to even begin to describe the enormity of the problems that we face, and that we are partially responsible for, let alone coming up with solutions!
-
Clearly you don't understand what I am on about.
Let me try one more time. Western governments including our very own, have for years supported regimes that to put it bluntly are run by nasty, sadistic, butchering bastards. We, who collectively vote for our governments are, each of us, in some small part responsible for that state of affairs. That people who are bombed out of their homes by said butchering bastards and tortured, and have their families ripped apart feel to put it mildly, a bit fucking miffed. They then look around and think where are these butchering bastards getting all their weapons from - oh look the USA or the UK. It is then no big surprise to me that there is a payback involved. That the payback comes from various directions because of the way hatred seeps through the cracks of communities should also be no big surprise. So although our recent spate of terrorists were homegrown they were fed by fertilizer that was spread over the ground in the form of bombs in areas of the Middle East.
To not even contemplate that there are reasons for terrorists to act, no matter how twisted their logic is, is lazy thinking born of an assumed privilige and feeling of innate superiority that really has no basis in actual fact.
You obviously haven't understood my posts either, let's just leave it at that.
-
Our laws have to protect our people and our way of life.
And what are our people and our way of life?
-
You obviously haven't understood my posts either, let's just leave it at that.
Well seeing as your posts are generally short and sometimes non-sequitars, I think I have a fair grasp of them. From the way you have posted on here you appear not to want to acknowledge that our actions (as a country) have consequences. No amount of talk about innocence of victims will change that. Only thinking about our actions and changing them if that is what we think may help solve the problems.
I will leave you with this thought. If our government had not sat down to talk with terrorists, deaths would still be happening in N Ireland (I know there are still a few deaths - but largely the situation is unrecognizable compared to three decades ago).
Now admittedly the situation in the Middle East is more complicated by a factor of probably several thousands but is it not worth considering other options - because the status quo is definitely not working.
-
I get what you are saying, Trent. There's no doubt that we need to get our own house in order.
But IS can't be negotiated with. As they have said, we can surrender and cease all fighting and they will still hate us and kill us simply because of who we are.
Incidentally, after the latest atrocity is anyone interested in meaningful discussion with Britain First? Or are they the wrong kind of terrorist to be seen to be glad-handing with?
-
Well seeing as your posts are generally short and sometimes non-sequitars, I think I have a fair grasp of them. From the way you have posted on here you appear not to want to acknowledge that our actions (as a country) have consequences. No amount of talk about innocence of victims will change that. Only thinking about our actions and changing them if that is what we think may help solve the problems.
I will leave you with this thought. If our government had not sat down to talk with terrorists, deaths would still be happening in N Ireland (I know there are still a few deaths - but largely the situation is unrecognizable compared to three decades ago).
Now admittedly the situation in the Middle East is more complicated by a factor of probably several thousands but is it not worth considering other options - because the status quo is definitely not working.
The IRA, as bad as they are, have some rationale on their side due to the disgusting way the Irish had been treated by the British. ISIS is a whole different ball game imo, their actions are based on their take on what Allah expects of them and they are unlikely to listen to reason.
-
I get what you are saying, Trent. There's no doubt that we need to get our own house in order.
But IS can't be negotiated with. As they have said, we can surrender and cease all fighting and they will still hate us and kill us simply because of who we are.
Incidentally, after the latest atrocity is anyone interested in meaningful discussion with Britain First? Or are they the wrong kind of terrorist to be seen to be glad-handing with?
In the short term I would agree - but minds change in every organization overtime. Intransigence can soften although I grant you that IS are very, very unusual in their mindset. But that doesn't mean that we can't win hearts and minds elsewhere in the region that may help improve our standing and reduce risks we face.
-
I'm afraid, with IS just the very fact we're not Muslim & refuse to convert or are even the 'WRONG' type of Muslim, makes us worthy of death.
They seem to be on some sort of incredibly warped mission to destroy anything they feel doesn't fit in with their version of Islam. They must be stopped at all, most, costs.
Nick
-
Winning hearts and minds elsewhere in the region is a laudable and worthy aim - but realistically, would it really have any effect where we need it, i.e. on IS? I can't see it. As Rhi said, some factions simply can't be reasoned with. Die-hard Nazis at the end of WWII. Japanese High Command likewise. When attachment to a goal or an ideology trumps sanity itself, the chances of discussing things around a table are ... well, nonexistent.
These are people so wedded to the idea of death for and in the name of The Cause that they regard a love of life and peace as a degenerate weakness of decadents.
-
Winning hearts and minds elsewhere in the region is a laudable and worthy aim - but realistically, would it really have any effect where we need it, i.e. on IS? I can't see it. As Rhi said, some factions simply can't be reasoned with. Die-hard Nazis at the end of WWII. Japanese High Command likewise.
Then we are condemned to even more death of the very innocents that Floo is getting so upset about. I don't know the answers I just know that the response we are giving at the moment is not producing any improvements.
Perhaps we have to accept that we are partially responsible for this whole mess and there is no way out. Perhaps Floo is right we need to go on arming vicious regimes.
There, right there is a very depressing thought.
-
I feel much the same way.
I'm reluctant to go into it further, partly because I don't feel as though I have any answers either and partly because I don't want to come over as some sort of keyboard general (which I'm definitely not).
-
As I've said before, I think IS will fizzle out - experts on this call it jihad fatigue. But not before more mayhem, suffering and grief.
Fanaticism get very boring after a while. Even more so when it doesn't really succeed. And although people driving vans into other people is horrible, we've faced and survived worse.
-
True.
My youth (such as it was - yes, I did have one) was punctuated by IRA atrocities that you can reel off as a list of names. Omagh. Warrington. Enniskillen. The Republicans however did prove themselves to be amenable to discussion, and although there are still numerous problems and tensions in NI and the situation is a long, long way from perfect, for years now we've had a form of peace - wobbly at times, true, but even so. I don't think this can be said of IS so the best we can hope for is Rhi's jihad fatigue and that it will eventually fizzle out and fade away.
What, if anything, could be done to accelerate that process: well, that's a poser.
Fanaticism may be boring after a while with most - especially when it shows no sign of achieving anything - but the problem with the minority but hardest of the hard core fanatics is that it leads to a redoubling of effort.
-
At least these hardcore fanatics want to die in the process too. That's a bonus.
-
I think there is a need to look under the hood of IS here. It's not in the sense of these attacks an organised structure such as many terrorist groupings in the past. It can claim and can be claimed by those carrying out atrocities but isn't necessarily anything other than a brand. I posted a link to an attack in zmelbourne recently where the idiot carrying it out both claimed the action, which deemed more thuggery than terrorism, in the name of Al Queda and IS, which since they oppose each other makes no sense.
I think we see the threat magnified under the 24/7 media coverage to be an existential threat when it isn't. It is the type of violence and in many ways at a lower level that we have had for at least 50 years, and as a theme for a lot longer. Many of the terrorist groups in Europe in the 70s were dedicated to the collapse of Western capitalism, indeed there was a strong Marxist wing in the IRA, so the idea that there were the nice sensible rational terrorists and now we have the nasty irrational ones is overly simplistic and the sort of narrative that politicians and media like.
I suspect that Rhiannon is right that we are in a sort of hula hoop fad of attacks at the moment, in part fed by the media and the need of sad fuckwits yobdoe and kill in the name of their latest obsession. But trentvoyager is definitely right that abrogating responsibility for the deaths of innocents caused by our game playing at geo politics is foolish and callous. If we back selling of arms and dropping of bombs that kill innocents, a condemnation of those who do the same is mere hypocrisy. The patents of a child killed in a Yemeni hospital would be mad to think that somehow that death was not as a result of evil simply because the bomb was produced with that special extra flavour, Western freedom.
And as ever, that isn't to say that any thug, who carries out any attack and cites the death of that child as a reason, is justified in any sense. Rather that their justification is worth exactly what out justifications are for supporting the sections that lead to the death of the child.
We are a species of scum and rainbows. If we solve one problem, we are inventive to create many others but that doesn't mean we stop trying to solve the problems. There is no simple equation that says if you stop x, then the 'othet' will stop that but I see no reason. For us to be supporting the bombing of areas where we have no coherent objective beyond it making us feel like we are doing something. I see no need to be arming regimes which are supportive of groups such as IS. I see no need for supporting regimes which carry out the exact same type of punishments that IS. While we continue to do those things we are not just hypocrites, we are evil hypocrites that support the whippings, and the beheadings and the killing of children.
-
You can negotiate, not with the IS hard-liners, but with IS supporters. These include those tribal areas in Syria and Iraq which for various reasons, accepted IS as a defensive line. Partly this was against Shia militias, about whom there is great fear in these areas, and also against the Iraqui govt and obviously the Syrian govt.
In fact, I am sure that such negotiations are going on. This happened before with AQ, and some tribes in Iraq eventually began to fight against them.
But this is also part of a carrot and stick approach. You offer some kind of deal with these tribal areas, and also pursue IS militants militarily.
In fact, there is something of a parallel here with IRA/Sinn Fein.
-
Then we are condemned to even more death of the very innocents that Floo is getting so upset about. I don't know the answers I just know that the response we are giving at the moment is not producing any improvements.
Perhaps we have to accept that we are partially responsible for this whole mess and there is no way out. Perhaps Floo is right we need to go on arming vicious regimes.
There, right there is a very depressing thought.
Where did I say that?
-
Where did I say that?
It seemed to be implied in your refusal to engage with the issues involved. If it is not the case I apologise.
-
One note on how we regard the IRA, is that reading Shaker's post where he notes he can reel off the atrocities, I am sure we all can. However,I doubt if we remember, and in many cases never saw, the lower level attacks and murders particularly in NI. Again in the days of rolling news, we have in depth coverage of incidents such as that at the Louvre which I doubt we would have seen in the 80s. Every violent nutter who shouts Allahu Akbar is an IS terrorist, but that wasn't the case for every attack or Proddy cunts or Fenian bastards in the 70s, 80s and through to the present.
And while I am off on this point, it's worth noting that there was terrorism from the UVF and others. I think we need to be careful about using the IRA as a cypher for all terrorism in relation to NI. Also I read a lot of posts on here, about Muslims and if you put in the word Catholics were things I heard growing up.
-
Where did I say that?
Surely implied in you saying you disagreed with trentvoyager when he was arguing for stopping doing so?
-
I didn't imply it at all. ::)
-
I didn't imply it at all. ::)
in what way is saying you disagreed with trentvoyager's post arguing for stopping supplying such weapons to such regimes not implying it?
-
If you say so, I know what I mean, even if no one else does.
-
If you say so, I know what I mean, even if no one else does.
in what way is asking you a question to explain your position, 'saying something'?
-
One note on how we regard the IRA, is that reading Shaker's post where he notes he can reel off the atrocities, I am sure we all can. However,I doubt if we remember, and in many cases never saw, the lower level attacks and murders particularly in NI. Again in the days of rolling news, we have in depth coverage of incidents such as that at the Louvre which I doubt we would have seen in the 80s. Every violent nutter who shouts Allahu Akbar is an IS terrorist, but that wasn't the case for every attack or Proddy cunts or Fenian bastards in the 70s, 80s and through to the present.
And while I am off on this point, it's worth noting that there was terrorism from the UVF and others. I think we need to be careful about using the IRA as a cypher for all terrorism in relation to NI. Also I read a lot of posts on here, about Muslims and if you put in the word Catholics were things I heard growing up.
Yeah, IS claim responsibility for my local roadworks, Ed Sheeran and the heatwave. Actually back in the day the Welsh dipstick with his can would have been labelled a 'criminal'. I accept though that these days it's terrorism.
As an aside, although London was hit hard by the IR a sectarianism was unknown. My grandparents were an RC if Irish origin and an Anglican but nobody gave a hoot about any of it. If anyone pointed the finger at 'suspect' people, it was at 'the Irish'. Religion largely irrelevant to us.
-
Yeah, IS claim responsibility for my local roadworks, Ed Sheeran and the heatwave. Actually back in the day the Welsh dipstick with his can would have been labelled a 'criminal'. I accept though that these days it's terrorism.
As an aside, although London was hit hard by the IR a sectarianism was unknown. My grandparents were an RC if Irish origin and an Anglican but nobody gave a hoot about any of it. If anyone pointed the finger at 'suspect' people, it was at 'the Irish'. Religion largely irrelevant to us.
I was out with a friend a few weeks ago, the Monday after the murders on London Bridge and in Borough Market. He's from Belfast. We were talking about when we met in Glasgow in the 80s and he was saying that he found the sectarianism much more obvious in Glasgow than Belfast. In part we think because it wasn't quite as dangerous for those expressing it.
He lives in Wapping so had heard some of the controlled explosions but when he got back after having driven his son back to uni on Sunday, there was a huge police incident with 50 Met police and a dozen or so Marine police running up from their GQ nearby in lifejackets. Turns out it was a fight at a pub, where a policeman coming to arrest the idiots had been shoved by the mother of one of the idiots. Obviously in the current place this became much more worrying but no terrorism
Glasgow is better than it was but it has a history of knife crime where if three blokes turned up with machetes then they would be seen as a small underarmed incursion to many places. And much of that was at least nominally sectarian. So much of this is less about ideology than testorone.
ETA - As a Glaswegian I found Kilburn much more obviously sectarian to me than Glasgow, when I went into pubs in the early 80s and the collection tons went round.
-
Apparently the murderer in the van was 'self radicalising', I thought that meant you went blind.
-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40381794
-
What's our way of life? Who's "our" people?
It's constantly changing, what was our way of life in the 1950's isn't now.
Are we living in the 1950's? If you do not know our way of life and who the people who belong to GB are then you should start reading up.
Even our food and drink has changed enormously, due to outside influences.
Means zilch and Nada in this debate.
Are we supposed to freeze " our way of life" to 2017?
You want to freeze everything to people being blown up and run over?
Not a clever remark but you knew that. You are running out of arguments and creating suggestions that are plainly ridiculous and nothing
to do with what has been said.
Plus we are all different, my Sunday is very different to my ordained Christians friends "way of life".
You mean you don't wash, get dressed and have your meals? You don't watch tv or go our and read the papers?
Ridiculous isn't it. Tell me, is it the British way of life to commit suicide whilst blowing our children up?
Well then why make such a ridiculour remark?
A Muslims week is different again, who are we protecting? My ordained Christians friends over a Muslims way?
Is it the Peaceful Muslim or Christians who causing the trouble? So why make a stupid statement?
You are the one with the wrong thinking not myself.
The only thing we need to protect is our freedom, and unfortunately we are losing that anyway.
With freedom comes the risk of losing your "way of life".
Freedom is what happened to Sunday Trading, look at it now.
Freedom doesn't go hand in hand with " preserving our way of life"
To me " our people" includes Muslims and ethnic groups and their way of life too.
What does it mean to you Sassy?
Basically white and Christian?
Since man has stopped honouring the Sabbath day look at all that has befell this country.
As for the other rubbish you posted not everyone believes that suicide bombers who are terrorist are just a figment of a white christians or any other race or religions imagination.
The terrorist exist,. they kill and there is no prejudice involved when saying that stricter regulations about who comes here as a an asylum seeker
need vetting very strongly.
You see the prejudice is figament of your imagination. In reality we do not want terrorist here. That goes without saying from people of every colour and religion.
-
Sass your comment about bad things happening in the UK because Sunday is not regarded as the 'sabbath' by many people these days, is really silly! ::)
-
Bad things have always happened. Our parents were kids during WWll,experienced bombing and casualties which to them was horrific. The sabbath was observed then but it didn't stop war.
Those on both sides of the Irish troubles observed the Sabbath.
-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-40397028
Another atrocity, this time in Newcastle! >:(
-
Except the police say it's not terror related. Driver's been arrested at the scene. Sounds like an accident of some kind, possibly involving dangerous driving.
-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-40397028
Another atrocity, this time in Newcastle! >:(
Not believed to be terrorist related
-
I am a bit surprised the police have ruled that out so quickly!
-
I am a bit surprised the police have ruled that out so quickly!
You mean the police whose job it is, who are there,aren't as expert as you calling it an atrocity on the basis of a news report that says it isn't believed to be terrorist related with all your long years of working in this area?
-
You mean the police whose job it is, who are there,aren't as expert as you calling it an atrocity on the basis of a news report that says it isn't believed to be terrorist related with all your long years of working in this area?
All I said, I was surprised they had ruled terrorism out so quickly, I didn't say they weren't right to do so! ::)
-
All I said, I was surprised they had ruled terrorism out so quickly, I didn't say they weren't right to do so! ::)
So why did you call it an atrocity on the basis of a report that said it wasn't terrorist related?
-
It seems that the main reason they ruled terrorism out is that the driver is one of the Muslims leaving prayer who then lost control of her car.
Got to hand it to our police, they spot the clues straight away.
-
I am a bit surprised the police have ruled that out so quickly!
Perhaps that is because they have investigated the circumstances and that the details are such that the police could quickly conclude that terrorism wasn't involved.
-
I am a bit surprised the police have ruled that out so quickly!
Maybe it was because they used mobile phones and texts to communicate rather than rely on emails and land lines?
::)