Terrorist Attacks - WARNING: CONTAINS DISTRESSING IMAGES

[buctootim]

Sometimes I feel that OUR society is overtly sexualised; tarty soap operas, cross-dressing 'comedy' adverts (I have nothing against cross-dressing itself, but the adverts are distasteful imo), newspapers and mags obsessed with tits and arse and affairs, slutty music videos.

 

We all have different values and tastes. The Muslims you talk about are more conservative than me but in my experience, limited admittedly, the sons and daughters of those conservative Muslims will naturally become closer to our values than their parents, and society moves on together. No real friction.

 

I agree with a lot of that. I think some of the attraction to Islam for some people is how over sexualised our society has become. We've moved from an era of sexual repression in the 1950s to an almost adolescent sexual obsession.

[Sour Mash]

Sometimes I feel that OUR society is overtly sexualised; tarty soap operas, cross-dressing 'comedy' adverts (I have nothing against cross-dressing itself, but the adverts are distasteful imo), newspapers and mags obsessed with tits and arse and affairs, slutty music videos.

 

We all have different values and tastes. The Muslims you talk about are more conservative than me but in my experience, limited admittedly, the sons and daughters of those conservative Muslims will naturally become closer to our values than their parents, and society moves on together. No real friction.

Unlikely, given the increase in muslim schools and ghettos, as demonstrated in the numbers of 2nd generation Muslims that headed off to join ISIS.

[Turkish]

I agree with a lot of that. I think some of the attraction to Islam for some people is how over sexualised our society has become. We've moved from an era of sexual repression in the 1950s to an almost adolescent sexual obsession.

 

Surely it shouldn't be an attraction as the Koran forbids homosexuality and with our modern, sexualised society this would mean they are exposed to something they are opposed to.

[Lighthouse]

Some of the arguments here are obsolete. He was British born and previously called Adrian, and had as much right to be here as you or I (unfortunately). No amount of border control would have stopped this. It's how we stop normal people turning into radicalised nutters that is the question to be answered.

 

A good start would be banning all religious schools as nothing breeds extremism like segregation and isolation. I don't know anything about this chap's background but certainly the French and Belgian attackers lived in Muslim slums in large cities. We need to try and combat ghettoisation, although that's easier said than done.

[hypochondriac]

A really good link. Here is someone who recognises that their community needs to do more and is working to fight back.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/westminster-attack-terrorism-prevent-strategy-fundraising-peace-a7647481.html

[hypochondriac]

A good start would be banning all religious schools as nothing breeds extremism like segregation and isolation. I don't know anything about this chap's background but certainly the French and Belgian attackers lived in Muslim slums in large cities. We need to try and combat ghettoisation, although that's easier said than done.

That seems like a disproportionate response to me and penalises Christian faith schools who as far as I am aware have never been linked to ghettoisation

[sadoldgit]

The common refrain from you soggy and others like you when someone brings up Islamic terrorism and how a majority of Muslims believe some despicable things are things like "Christians are just as bad" "what about the crusades?" "Nazis were Christian you know" "lets just talk to IS we don't have to get rid of them." You tie yourself up in knots trying to downplay the effect of radical Islam over the last 20 years and absolutely refusing to concede that some of the responsibility for this rests on the shoulders of the Islamic communities in the UK. I condemn all forms of extremism but it is clear for all to see that it's the extremism emanating from the Islamic community that has been the cause of an overwhelming number of deaths and appaling crimes in recent years.

 

The simple truth is that many Muslims have some hideously regressive views that should be abhorrent to anyone who values Western values and freedom. Islamic extremism is a threat to our society and needs to be urgently tackled both by Western society and in the Islamic communities themselves. Do you disagree?

 

In any discussion there has to be a measure of balance. We have talked about the "Christians" or "The West" as not being perfect either and quite rightly. Muslims don't have the monopoly on poor behaviour. What puzzles me is that for someone who has married into a Muslim family, you seem completely insensitive to Islamophobia. Do you not read Sour Mash's posts? On pretty much a daily basis he attacks Islam (not just the extremists) but you let him be and go after those who support peaceful Muslims. Why is that? I don't see apologists here. I see people sick to death of the extremist attacks but also mindful that we are not blameless and the policies of "The West" have done nothing to help relations between us. You now seem to be obsessed with normal Muslims being responsible for these nutters and not doing enough to distance themselves from the attacks. After a recent attack thousands of Muslims took to the streets of London to protest against IS and extremism. This seems to have passed you and the mainstream media by. Right after the attack the other day Muslims started an online request for money for the fallen PCs family and had raised £3k within the first hour. There are constant pictures of Muslims holding placards saying not in my name. How do you know that communities are not working with the police and security services on a regular basis? And why should a normal, peaceful Muslim be held responsible for the actions of a delusional psychopath? On the same day of the attack, Michael Lane was sentenced to 25 years in prison for cutting the throat of his former girlfriend. Are you are I responsible for his actions? Of course not. Muslims are just as likely to die in these random attacks and are probably are just as concerned as we are about the possibility of getting caught up in something like this. Many of the people who carry out these attacks have criminal records. The current guy has a previous history of violence, knifing several people. Why is this guy the responsibility of other Muslims? One of the most affecting quotes of the last couple of days comes from Jo Cox's husband, Brendan Cox - "The person who did this is no more representative of British Muslims than the person who killed Jo is a representative of the people that are from Yorkshire." If a man who lost his loved one can see that Muslims are not responsible for the actions of a minority of extremists, why cant you?

[sadoldgit]

You're not too bothered about importing a culture that inflicts murder and terror across western Europe, in fact you think its a good thing. All from that muslim hotbed of Bath North-East Somerset Mental.

 

And yet you are more likely to be killed by a boy racer from your own town in his car than a terrorist. Mental.

[Jonnyboy]

"Nigel Farage is 52 and from Kent. So is the alleged Westminster attacker. When will we tackle this problem of 52-year-olds from Kent?"

 

[aintforever]

The problem is that it is quite clearly a Muslim problem but you can't say that without people going spastic accusing you of blaming all Muslims. So the issue just gets swept under the carpet - lets just keep it simple and say it was a nutcase and Islam is peaceful then there is no issue to address.

[Lord Duckhunter]

"Nigel Farage is 52 and from Kent. So is the alleged Westminster attacker. When will we tackle this problem of 52-year-olds from Kent?"

 

 

You better hurry up because he turns 53 next week

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[aintforever]

"Nigel Farage is 52 and from Kent. So is the alleged Westminster attacker. When will we tackle this problem of 52-year-olds from Kent?"

 

 

To be fair, if numerous 52 year olds from Kent had been committing multiple mass murders of innocents all around the world for years, in the name of "52 year olds from Kent" then we would probably have done something about it long ago.

[Jonnyboy]

The problem is that it is quite clearly a Muslim problem but you can't say that without people going spastic accusing you of blaming all Muslims. So the issue just gets swept under the carpet - lets just keep it simple and say it was a nutcase and Islam is peaceful then there is no issue to address.

 

So you are saying the security services aren't addressing it? Are there not various anti-terror laws, surveillance increases, hate speech laws etc etc.

[aintforever]

So you are saying the security services aren't addressing it? Are there not various anti-terror laws, surveillance increases, hate speech laws etc etc.

 

Of course they are. My point is that the problem of extremism is never going to be dealt with unless people are honest. It is a Muslim problem.

 

The vast majority of Muslims are peaceful but it doesn't make it any less of a Muslim problem. People need educating and that is not done by sweeping the issue under the carpet. I have little interest in any religion and the first time I heard of Wahhabism and its roots from Saudi Arabia was from a post on here (can't remember who from). I have not seen one Muslim spokes person on TV even mention it following one of these massacres, all we ever get is "Islam is peaceful" - and they wonder why people in the west don't understand what is going on?

Edited 24 March, 2017 by aintforever

[Lord Duckhunter]

To be fair, if numerous 52 year olds from Kent had been committing multiple mass murders of innocents all around the world for years, in the name of "52 year olds from Kent" then we would probably have done something about it long ago.

 

We need a like button on this forum

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jonnyboy]

We need a like button on this forum

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

To be fair, most rapes are committed by men. When are we going to do something about all the men in this country?

Edited 24 March, 2017 by Jonnyboy

[Jonnyboy]

Of course they are. My point is that the problem of extremism is never going to be dealt with unless people are honest. It is a Muslim problem.

 

The vast majority of Muslims are peaceful but it doesn't make it any less of a Muslim problem. People need educating and that is not done by sweeping the issue under the carpet. I have little interest in any religion and the first time I heard of Wahhabism and its roots from Saudi Arabia was from a post on here (can't remember who from). I have not seen one Muslim spokes person on TV even mention it following one of these massacres, all we ever get is "Islam is peaceful" - and they wonder why people in the west don't understand what is going on?

 

When are people going to be honest about white extremism? Same day as Westminster attack:

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-army-veteran-james-harris-jackson-kill-black-man-new-york-timothy-caughman-sword-racist-attack-a7645736.html

[aintforever]

When are people going to be honest about white extremism? Same day as Westminster attack:

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-army-veteran-james-harris-jackson-kill-black-man-new-york-timothy-caughman-sword-racist-attack-a7645736.html

 

White extremism is a white problem, just like Islamic extremism is a Muslim problem.

 

Islamic extremism is a far bigger threat to our safety.

 

Honest enough for you?

[Lord Duckhunter]

To be fair, most rapes are committed by men. When are we hoi g to do something about all the men in this country?

 

All infanticide is committed by parents, when are we going to do something about parents in this country.

 

Here's a bet for you leftie . I bet the next mass killing on U.K. citizens will be by a Muslim . I don't know for defo , but I've got a sneaky feeling it maybe

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jonnyboy]

White extremism is a white problem, just like Islamic extremism is a Muslim problem.

 

Islamic extremism is a far bigger threat to our safety.

 

Honest enough for you?

 

So from you previous post some white people should be standing up and saying what they are going to do about this white extremism but they never do. Why?

[Jonnyboy]

All infanticide is committed by parents, when are we going to do something about parents in this country.

 

Here's a bet for you leftie . I bet the next mass killing on U.K. citizens will be by a Muslim . I don't know for defo , but I've got a sneaky feeling it maybe

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Cars kill about 1700 people a year here. When are we going to all stand up and do something about it? Where are the representatives of all the drivers in this country explaining how they are going to change things and stop sweeping the issue under the carpet?

[aintforever]

So from you previous post some white people should be standing up and saying what they are going to do about this white extremism but they never do. Why?

 

Plenty of people have spoken out about the far right, I don't remember ever hearing "whites are peaceful people, it's not a white problem" after a white supremacist mass murder.

[Jonnyboy]

Plenty of people have spoken out about the far right, I don't remember ever hearing "whites are peaceful people, it's not a white problem" after a white supremacist mass murder.

 

That's because no one ever says this is a white problem, or a Christian problem. It always a "disturbed loner" with "mental issues." Probably what they'll say when Sour Mash gets nicked for setting fire to his local Mosque.

[aintforever]

That's because no one ever says this is a white problem, or a Christian problem. It always a "disturbed loner" with "mental issues." Probably what they'll say when Sour Mash gets nicked for setting fire to his local Mosque.

 

That's because it usually is a disturbed loner, not gangs of people flying aircraft into sky scrapers, blowing up trains and airports or organised mass shootings. If it was just the odd loner I don't think anyone would be pointing the finger at the religion.

[Lord Duckhunter]

That's because no one ever says this is a white problem, or a Christian problem. It always a "disturbed loner" with "mental issues." Probably what they'll say when Sour Mash gets nicked for setting fire to his local Mosque.

 

What a load of pony. To be a loner you have to be alone. Islamic state have said he was one of their own. The clues in the name ISLAMIC state

 

A white nutter, like a Methodist nutter or Sikh is clearly someone with mental health issues ala Michael Ryan. The Muslim issue, like the paddys before is clearly a pattern. I really don't understand why you don't get it

 

Question for you,

Do you think the next attack in the U.K. will be committed by

 

A) White 52 year old from Kent

B) Sikh

C( Muslim

D)White man

E) Christian

F) Methodist

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited 24 March, 2017 by Lord Duckhunter

[Jonnyboy]

That's because it usually is a disturbed loner, not gangs of people flying aircraft into sky scrapers, blowing up trains and airports or organised mass shootings. If it was just the odd loner I don't think anyone would be pointing the finger at the religion.

 

That didn't happen this week. Or anytime for nearly 10 years in the UK. And still mass hysteria.

[Jonnyboy]

What a load of pony. To be a loner you have to be alone. Islamic state have said he was one of their own. The clues in the name ISLAMIC state

 

A white nutter, like a Methodist nutter or Sikh is clearly someone with mental health issues ala Michael Ryan. The Muslim issue, like the paddys before is clearly a pattern. I really don't understand why you don't get it

 

Question for you,

Do you think the next attack in the U.K. will be committed by

 

A) White 52 year old from Kent

B) Sikh

C( Muslim

D)White man

E) Christian

F) Methodist

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Of course IS will claim it, they want as much publicity as possible and we're giving it to them.

 

Stop neighing so much, you're giving the world a headache.

[Lord Duckhunter]

Of course IS will claim it, they want as much publicity as possible and we're giving it to them.

 

Stop neighing so much, you're giving the world a headache.

 

So they'll claim it, even if it's a Sikh?

 

Personally , my money's on a Muslim. But I maybe wrong . The terrorist market is hard to read , I tend to back the odds on favourite "Muslim " but would welcome any other tips you've got . Perhaps Scientology looks a good bet at 9,0000-1

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited 24 March, 2017 by Lord Duckhunter

[hypochondriac]

Of course they are. My point is that the problem of extremism is never going to be dealt with unless people are honest. It is a Muslim problem.

 

The vast majority of Muslims are peaceful but it doesn't make it any less of a Muslim problem. People need educating and that is not done by sweeping the issue under the carpet. I have little interest in any religion and the first time I heard of Wahhabism and its roots from Saudi Arabia was from a post on here (can't remember who from). I have not seen one Muslim spokes person on TV even mention it following one of these massacres, all we ever get is "Islam is peaceful" - and they wonder why people in the west don't understand what is going on?

100% this. I am in total agreement.

[hypochondriac]

That's because no one ever says this is a white problem, or a Christian problem. It always a "disturbed loner" with "mental issues." Probably what they'll say when Sour Mash gets nicked for setting fire to his local Mosque.

When the white man doctrine tells people to kill the unbeliever and to wage jihad on them then you may be more likely to hear it referred to as a white people problem.

[Jonnyboy]

When the white man doctrine tells people to kill the unbeliever and to wage jihad on them then you may be more likely to hear it referred to as a white people problem.

 

And you married into a Muslim family believing that??

[Jonnyboy]

Meanwhile western bombs killing hundreds of civilians in Iraq and Syria this week:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/24/mosuls-children-were-shouting-under-the-rubble-nobody-came?CMP=fb_gu

Plenty more recruits for isis class of 2025 then.

[Sweetcorn]

And you married into a Muslim family believing that??

 

That's not what I believe, that's what the Koran says.

[Jonnyboy]

That's not what I believe, that's what the Koran says.

 

Looks like you logged into another one of your accounts by mistake Hypo.

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

So I gather that some on here feel that Khalid Masood's murderous rampage in Westminster is the result of his take on the Muslim religion and not this particular individual's history of personality disorder. The fact that his ex-wife has chosen to describe him as a "violent controlling psychopath" must be tangential to the question of religious doctrine then. His long and appalling criminal record, coupled with seemingly reliable reports that he once held a knife to a friend's(!) throat uttering "I want some f**king blood", are also matters that need not long concern us presumably. Perhaps Thomas Hamilton and Robert Ryan were also secret religious fanatics intent on overthrowing western society and not the mad/bad men they appeared to be ...

 

It seems me that this is far too simplistic and that religion is often employed as an EXCUSE for a individual's violent behaviour that in reality springs primarily from deep-seated psychological problems and social alienation those concerned are quite incapable of addressing. For that matter, 20th Century history teaches us that godless ideologies are equally prone to attract individuals of this psychotic type - I take it some of you lot did actually go to school didn't you? How on earth can you even hope to comprehend the problem of modern terrorism without putting that issue into its proper historical context and accepting that we in the west are at least partially responsible for the state of civil war much of the Islamic world is now immersed in? Violence breeds violence.

 

Obviously many of the fanatics who commit these horrendous terrorist crimes justify their behaviour with the argument that they are soldiers fighting in some "holy war". Where in practical terms does that banal realisation get us in modern Britain I wonder? For example, would condemning and suppressing the Catholic faith during the hight of the IRA's 'long war' during the 1970s and 80's have made the terrorist situation here better or worse? It seems to me that your average British Muslim in 2017 is no more responsible for the Westminster outrage than peaceful and law-abiding British Catholics living in Aldershot were responsible for the 1972 IRA bombing there. There is crime and there is punishment - the latter the responsibility of the forces of law and order.

 

I refuse to condemn the faith of millions because of the actions of the extremists. Indeed, this blatant "them and us" view of modern society so often displayed on here is far more dangerous to us all I think than terrorism ever could be.

[Saint Albert]

Significant portions of the Muslim population worldwide support views that are wholly incompatible with western countries. A frightening array of surveys reveal popular support, or the support of a sizeable minority, for honour violence, for terrorist organizations, for not reporting suspected terrorist plots, for stifling free speech particularly where it concerns religion...I could go on. If we continue to blame this on lone idiots, the sole bad apple, and do not at least have a conversation about popular views that help to incubate extremist and isolationist tendencies, we will still be talking about this problem decades into the future.

 

It is very dangerous to ignore actions such as last week's murderous rampage as merely the act of a deranged lone wolf, or simply a bad apple. The terrorist who attacked parliament in Canada a few years ago was a complete loser as well with a drug-related criminal record. Organized extremists through Internet propaganda and the influence of hate preachers prey on the stupid, the disillusioned, the weak, the disenfranchised. They weaponize anti social behaviour through indoctrination and turn a petty criminal into a mass-murderer. It is no coincidence that last week's individual used a mass-killing technique repeatedly advocated by extremist groups like ISIS.

[Bath Saint]

I've answered this question many times before, there's not much we can do, the damage is done.

 

No answer to any of my questions, still a fan of importing terrorism to Western Europe I see.

Of course I'm not a fan of importing terrorism. I have no problem, however, with allowing immigration from a controlled number of Muslims. I don't see the two as the same. You however, seem to.

 

But you also seem to be just a snowflake, sticking your hands in the air and saying 'too late, damage is done' - moaning and whining but without any real solutions. That's not good enough. Man up and have some courage in your convictions. If you REALLY believe that ALL Muslims are dangerous and terrorists in the making, then something needs to be done about it, wouldn't you agree? In your ideal world, what would you do? It just isn't good enough saying that it's too late and nothing can be done.

 

Or is it? In which case, you're inviting terrorism to happen and are a traitor.

[Jonnyboy]

Significant portions of the Muslim population worldwide support views that are wholly incompatible with western countries. A frightening array of surveys reveal popular support, or the support of a sizeable minority, for honour violence, for terrorist organizations, for not reporting suspected terrorist plots, for stifling free speech particularly where it concerns religion...I could go on. If we continue to blame this on lone idiots, the sole bad apple, and do not at least have a conversation about popular views that help to incubate extremist and isolationist tendencies, we will still be talking about this problem decades into the future.

 

It is very dangerous to ignore actions such as last week's murderous rampage as merely the act of a deranged lone wolf, or simply a bad apple. The terrorist who attacked parliament in Canada a few years ago was a complete loser as well with a drug-related criminal record. Organized extremists through Internet propaganda and the influence of hate preachers prey on the stupid, the disillusioned, the weak, the disenfranchised. They weaponize anti social behaviour through indoctrination and turn a petty criminal into a mass-murderer. It is no coincidence that last week's individual used a mass-killing technique repeatedly advocated by extremist groups like ISIS.

 

You really think such actions as last week's are being ignored? It's on the news 24/7 with 99% of the people in country discussing it within hours. New laws have been introduced in recent years, more money has gone to the security services, 52% of referendum voters giving us a Brexit many of them in response to refugee fears from Syria's civil war, we are bombing ISIS for years in Syria, Iraq and other countries, and more.

 

Thankfully, the vast majority of British are actually content with their neighbourhood and lives, despite the right wing press trying to have everyone living in fear:

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/03/many-right-wingers-hate-britain-much/

[Saint Albert]

You really think such actions as last week's are being ignored? It's on the news 24/7 with 99% of the people in country discussing it within hours. New laws have been introduced in recent years, more money has gone to the security services, 52% of referendum voters giving us a Brexit many of them in response to refugee fears from Syria's civil war, we are bombing ISIS for years in Syria, Iraq and other countries, and more.

 

Thankfully, the vast majority of British are actually content with their neighbourhood and lives, despite the right wing press trying to have everyone living in fear:

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/03/many-right-wingers-hate-britain-much/

 

Ignore was the wrong word...Interpret may have been better.

 

I was just trying to say that we should not dismiss attacks like this as isolated events tied exclusively to an individual attacker's personal criminal ideations. An ideology turned him from a village bully, petty criminal and general loser into a mass murderer.

[shurlock]

You really think such actions as last week's are being ignored? It's on the news 24/7 with 99% of the people in country discussing it within hours. New laws have been introduced in recent years, more money has gone to the security services, 52% of referendum voters giving us a Brexit many of them in response to refugee fears from Syria's civil war, we are bombing ISIS for years in Syria, Iraq and other countries, and more.

 

Thankfully, the vast majority of British are actually content with their neighbourhood and lives, despite the right wing press trying to have everyone living in fear:

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/03/many-right-wingers-hate-britain-much/

 

Cant access the link - its behind a paywall.

[whelk]

Spoke to a mate today who had a relative who recently did time and said there were so many attempts to radicalise him in jail. Can't be too hard to crack down on that surely.

http://news.sky.com/story/govt-told-to-tackle-worrying-rise-of-radicalisation-in-uk-jails-10813142?dcmp=snt-sf-twitter

[Verbal]

I was just trying to say that we should not dismiss attacks like this as isolated events tied exclusively to an individual attacker's personal criminal ideations. An ideology turned him from a village bully, petty criminal and general loser into a mass murderer.

 

This is exactly right in my view. The ideology that turned a petty criminal into a violent and manipulable jihadist can be found in numerous strains of Islam. Wahhabi Islam and its many variants in Salafism are the drivers of this, but it cannot be left there.

 

While many on the liberal left makes a fuss when a woman in France or Germany is denied the right to wear a headscarf, it can't just be ignored that the countries containing the most dangerous fundamentalism are those demanding loudest, on threat of violence and persecution, that women cover their heads and show 'modesty'. A supposed triumph of choice here is oppression of women there. Similar sentiments and violence apply to gays and anyone who questions the theocratic pretensions in the dominant strains of Islam.

 

The first victims of all this are those Muslims who are silenced, beaten, and murdered for defending the idea of a enlightenment in Islam.

 

And this is where many on the left in the West and violent Islamism join forces: denouncing such figures as Ayaan Hirsi Ali and other liberal reformers as 'Islamophobic'. This odd alliance share an anti-Western, anti-American, anti-Israeli outlook. At least partly in consequence, fundamentalist Islam has been given a free pass.

 

The probable rage with which Masood carried out his attack had something to do with a feeling of overwhelming self-righteousness, which told him that the oppression of his adopted religion was real and that any critique of it whatsoever was an attack on all Muslims.

 

A lot of this sentiment comes from those who advocate ISIS-style violence.

 

Some of it comes from those who ally themselves with such fundamentalists and stridently 'conservative' Muslims in the west, as if the latter were somehow the oppressed. They are not.

[JRM]

This is exactly right in my view. The ideology that turned a petty criminal into a violent and manipulable jihadist can be found in numerous strains of Islam. Wahhabi Islam and its many variants in Salafism are the drivers of this, but it cannot be left there.

 

While many on the liberal left makes a fuss when a woman in France or Germany is denied the right to wear a headscarf, it can't just be ignored that the countries containing the most dangerous fundamentalism are those demanding loudest, on threat of violence and persecution, that women cover their heads and show 'modesty'. A supposed triumph of choice here is oppression of women there. Similar sentiments and violence apply to gays and anyone who questions the theocratic pretensions in the dominant strains of Islam.

 

The first victims of all this are those Muslims who are silenced, beaten, and murdered for defending the idea of a enlightenment in Islam.

 

And this is where many on the left in the West and violent Islamism join forces: denouncing such figures as Ayaan Hirsi Ali and other liberal reformers as 'Islamophobic'. This odd alliance share an anti-Western, anti-American, anti-Israeli outlook. At least partly in consequence, fundamentalist Islam has been given a free pass.

 

The probable rage with which Masood carried out his attack had something to do with a feeling of overwhelming self-righteousness, which told him that the oppression of his adopted religion was real and that any critique of it whatsoever was an attack on all Muslims.

 

A lot of this sentiment comes from those who advocate ISIS-style violence.

 

Some of it comes from those who ally themselves with such fundamentalists and stridently 'conservative' Muslims in the west, as if the latter were somehow the oppressed. They are not.

 

Thats a good post.

 

More does need to be done about Muslim converts in British prisons, there are so many and they are often prime candidates for radicalisation.

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

...

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

This is exactly right in my view. The ideology that turned a petty criminal into a violent and manipulable jihadist can be found in numerous strains of Islam. Wahhabi Islam and its many variants in Salafism are the drivers of this, but it cannot be left there.

 

While many on the liberal left makes a fuss when a woman in France or Germany is denied the right to wear a headscarf, it can't just be ignored that the countries containing the most dangerous fundamentalism are those demanding loudest, on threat of violence and persecution, that women cover their heads and show 'modesty'. A supposed triumph of choice here is oppression of women there. Similar sentiments and violence apply to gays and anyone who questions the theocratic pretensions in the dominant strains of Islam.

 

The first victims of all this are those Muslims who are silenced, beaten, and murdered for defending the idea of a enlightenment in Islam.

 

And this is where many on the left in the West and violent Islamism join forces: denouncing such figures as Ayaan Hirsi Ali and other liberal reformers as 'Islamophobic'. This odd alliance share an anti-Western, anti-American, anti-Israeli outlook. At least partly in consequence, fundamentalist Islam has been given a free pass.

 

The probable rage with which Masood carried out his attack had something to do with a feeling of overwhelming self-righteousness, which told him that the oppression of his adopted religion was real and that any critique of it whatsoever was an attack on all Muslims.

 

A lot of this sentiment comes from those who advocate ISIS-style violence.

 

Some of it comes from those who ally themselves with such fundamentalists and stridently 'conservative' Muslims in the west, as if the latter were somehow the oppressed. They are not.

 

I would suggest that this man was a madman, in the same mould as somebody in the States who goes berserk and shoots his work colleagues. That is why it was impossible to prevent this attack. He just aligned himself to the Muslim faith. There certainly appear to be no video of him proclaiming his intentions with an ISIS flag and a copy of the Koran.

 

You are far better qualified to speak on this issue than me but I do take issue with the idea of banning people from wearing the headscarf. I am not on the liberal left but I hate the idea of banning the headscarf. Maybe for teachers or those in court but it sends out all the wrong messages. If you allow somebody to settle here you should respect there customs and traditions and not tell them how to dress. It is a repressive step and goes against British values.

[Jonnyboy]

This is exactly right in my view. The ideology that turned a petty criminal into a violent and manipulable jihadist can be found in numerous strains of Islam. Wahhabi Islam and its many variants in Salafism are the drivers of this, but it cannot be left there.

 

While many on the liberal left makes a fuss when a woman in France or Germany is denied the right to wear a headscarf, it can't just be ignored that the countries containing the most dangerous fundamentalism are those demanding loudest, on threat of violence and persecution, that women cover their heads and show 'modesty'. A supposed triumph of choice here is oppression of women there. Similar sentiments and violence apply to gays and anyone who questions the theocratic pretensions in the dominant strains of Islam.

 

The first victims of all this are those Muslims who are silenced, beaten, and murdered for defending the idea of a enlightenment in Islam.

 

And this is where many on the left in the West and violent Islamism join forces: denouncing such figures as Ayaan Hirsi Ali and other liberal reformers as 'Islamophobic'. This odd alliance share an anti-Western, anti-American, anti-Israeli outlook. At least partly in consequence, fundamentalist Islam has been given a free pass.

 

The probable rage with which Masood carried out his attack had something to do with a feeling of overwhelming self-righteousness, which told him that the oppression of his adopted religion was real and that any critique of it whatsoever was an attack on all Muslims.

 

A lot of this sentiment comes from those who advocate ISIS-style violence.

 

Some of it comes from those who ally themselves with such fundamentalists and stridently 'conservative' Muslims in the west, as if the latter were somehow the oppressed. They are not.

 

As a liberal of course I oppose the enforcing of wearing or not wearing anything. That doesn't mean I suggest Wahabist muslims should be free to murder gay people and dominate women. It's ridiculous to suggest because we did not want to invade Iraq and oppose Israeli expansion that we are somehow in cahoots with ISIS ans the Saudis!

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

Significant portions of the Muslim population worldwide support views that are wholly incompatible with western countries. A frightening array of surveys reveal popular support, or the support of a sizeable minority, for honour violence, for terrorist organizations, for not reporting suspected terrorist plots, for stifling free speech particularly where it concerns religion...I could go on. If we continue to blame this on lone idiots, the sole bad apple, and do not at least have a conversation about popular views that help to incubate extremist and isolationist tendencies, we will still be talking about this problem decades into the future.

 

It is very dangerous to ignore actions such as last week's murderous rampage as merely the act of a deranged lone wolf, or simply a bad apple. The terrorist who attacked parliament in Canada a few years ago was a complete loser as well with a drug-related criminal record. Organized extremists through Internet propaganda and the influence of hate preachers prey on the stupid, the disillusioned, the weak, the disenfranchised. They weaponize anti social behaviour through indoctrination and turn a petty criminal into a mass-murderer. It is no coincidence that last week's individual used a mass-killing technique repeatedly advocated by extremist groups like ISIS.

 

You cite supposed Muslim "support" for terrorism without providing anything in the way of evidence to back that claim up. As far as this country is concerned a 2005 ICM poll (conducted in the aftermath of the notorious 'July 7th' bombing atrocity) showed that some 99% of British Muslims surveyed thought that the criminals responsible for that horrendous deed were in the wrong. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1510866/Poll-reveals-40pc-of-Muslims-want-sharia-law-in-UK.htm

 

l don't know about you but I would describe 99% as a "significant proportion". I also see no reason to doubt that a similar poll held today would not produce a very similar outcome. To be fair this same survey also indicated strong support for the introduction of Sharia Law in the UK - which is entirely unacceptable I think - and that 20% of those Muslims asked displayed some level of 'sympathy' towards the feelings and motivations of the young terrorists involved. But there again in the English language the word 'sympathy' is not quite synonymous with the nouns 'approval' or 'support' is it?

 

On the other hand different polls have produced widely differing results on this same question - as ever polling evidence is of limited value and always highly depended upon sample size, the selection methodology employed, and the exact wording of the questions asked. In conclusion, the best that can probably be said about the matter this is that evidence supporting any claim that mass Muslim approval for terrorism exists here in the UK is somewhat inconclusive at this time. Naturally the situation may be very different in other parts of the world.

 

Speaking of the international situation, if you seek to bring Canada into this debate then I must wonder why then you have chosen to overlook the relatively recent Québec City mosque shooting, another appalling crime which left six Muslims dead and scores more injured while they were peacefully at worship. But I don't recall any of the usual suspects on here expressing their disgust at that particular crime - not even one of Batman's (oh-so-familiar) "another day in" posts.

 

Back to Masood, I read this morning that the Police have concluded that he was most probably acting alone. I also see no dispute that this individual was indeed a violent and deeply troubled person - more so than your average "petty criminal" I think. Perhaps he was much like the French psychotic responsible for the similar vehicle based attack in Nice last year. Be that as it may, what I'm not seeing here is a explanation as to why millions of uninvolved Muslims in general are to blame for the actions of a few extremists, or indeed any meaningful solution proposed to the problem of Jihadi extremism. Indeed, is it not true that European nations (such as France) that have attempted to bring the Muslim faith under state control have experienced more terrorist crime than we have?

[Sour Mash]

You cite supposed Muslim "support" for terrorism without providing anything in the way of evidence to back that claim up.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/11433776/Quarter-of-British-Muslims-sympathise-with-Charlie-Hebdo-terrorists.html or

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4219154/Some-Muslims-support-carry-terror-attacks.html.

 

That was easy.

[Sour Mash]

Of course I'm not a fan of importing terrorism. I have no problem, however, with allowing immigration from a controlled number of Muslims. I don't see the two as the same. You however, seem to.

 

But you also seem to be just a snowflake, sticking your hands in the air and saying 'too late, damage is done' - moaning and whining but without any real solutions. That's not good enough. Man up and have some courage in your convictions. If you REALLY believe that ALL Muslims are dangerous and terrorists in the making, then something needs to be done about it, wouldn't you agree? In your ideal world, what would you do? It just isn't good enough saying that it's too late and nothing can be done.

 

Or is it? In which case, you're inviting terrorism to happen and are a traitor.

 

That's an abysmal effort. Have another try.

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

That was easy.

 

Taking the trouble to read beyond the first paragraph of a post should not prove too difficult either - even for you.