Incident in London

[BleedingClaret]

Steady on Andy old bean. You'll get labelled an islamaphobe. Somebody pushing a vile anti islamic agenda!

I seem to be developing a bit of a dislike for them, I must be rascist.

[ksrclaret]

I think it's a he'll of a lot more complicated than that mate. I think that the good Muslims I've met are just good people, that's it. It's not because of their religion, it's just who they are as people. That in most cases is the same in reverse, especially regarding the thug mentality I used to meet on a daily basis. However the out right hatred of gays, thinking themselves better than non Muslims, and total lack of respect for the girls on the estate. I fear that was more religious driven.

I suspect you're right there, but oppression of gays and women, and the belief that their way of life is 'better' isn't endemic to Islam. That happens across many religions.

But the point is there are good people being persecuted because their beliefs are being associated with evil, and as such they are being subjected to horrible levels of hatred even though they are just as innocent in all this as we are. We can't let that happen.

[Hapag Lloyd]

At what point do i report him for harrassment? I've only ever reported ad-bots and (i think) one guy who said he didn't want Rovers to go bust.

You were the biggest snitch on footymad.

[Imploding Turtle]

You were the biggest snitch on footymad.

That's complete bullshit. I don't think i reported anyone a single time over there.

[morpheus2]

Come on guys, don't forget - "Muslims are the collateral damage in this kind of attack".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfrOZj6EBRI" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And the lady in the burka with the beautiful 'love' motif emblazoned on it says Islamophobia will rise now and it's all about ignorance.
She's not wrong, it's all about ignorance.

[john'sroseyspecs]

As I look ahead, I am filled with foreboding. Like the Roman, I seem to see "the River Tiber foaming with much blood". That tragic and intractable phenomenon which we watch with horror on the other side of the Atlantic but which there is interwoven with the history and existence of the States itself, is coming upon us here by our own volition and our own neglect. Indeed, it has all but come. In numerical terms, it will be of American proportions long before the end of the century. Only resolute and urgent action will avert it even now. Whether there will be the public will to demand and obtain that action, I do not know. All I know is that to see, and not to speak, would be the great betrayal.[11] Was true then and true now.

[Lancasterclaret]

Crap

What would be the greatest mistake would be to let the likes of ISIS win by changing who we are and want we are because of it.

[nil_desperandum]

Why? Do you know how many people go on these attractions and how many get killed each year?

You are far more likely to get gunned down in a gospel church in Texas than you are likely to get blown up at a tourist attraction.

Over 30,000 people get shot dead in the States each year, yet it isn't considered a problem.

More to the point, he and his family are hundreds of times more likely to die on the road on the journey to the attraction. But I suppose you could just keep your children at home, where indeed they are also more likely to be seriously hurt than in a terrorist incident.

[RingoMcCartney]

Repeating the same thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome is, by definition, insanity.

Time for a ZERO TOLERANCE approach.

The MAXIMUM APPEASEMENT approach is clearly not working........

[Lancasterclaret]

The only people who think its MAXIMIN APPEASEMENT are the people who don't read up on their ideas in case someone, anyone, EVERY example tells them that its a bad idea.

Its okay Ringo, lock your door and don't risk anything, us Liberals have got this, you don't need to worry.

[RingoMcCartney]

Cheers for that Lancs!

[BleedingClaret]

It's about identifying your enemy.
The fifth column is alive and well and on benefits.

[Imploding Turtle]

It's about identifying your enemy.
The fifth column is alive and well and on benefits.

So the enemy is the poor now?

[Goalposts]

The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule. Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding. Muslims who do not join the fight are called 'hypocrites' and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter.
Unlike nearly all of the Old Testament verses of violence, most verses of violence in the Quran are open-ended, meaning that they are not necessarily restrained by historical context contained in the surrounding text (although many Muslims choose to think of them that way). They are part of the eternal, unchanging word of Allah, and just as relevant or subject to interpretation as anything else in the Quran.

The context of violent passages is more ambiguous than might be expected of a perfect book from a loving God. Most contemporary Muslims exercise a personal choice to interpret their holy book's call to arms according to their own moral preconceptions about justifiable violence. Islam apologists cater to these preferences with tenuous arguments that gloss over historical fact and generally don't stand up to scrutiny. Still, it is important to note that the problem is not bad people, but bad ideology.

Unfortunately, there are very few verses of tolerance and peace to balance out the many that call for nonbelievers to be fought and subdued until they either accept humiliation, convert to Islam, or are killed. Muhammad's own martial legacy, along with the remarkable stress on violence found in the Quran, have produced a trail of blood and tears across world history.

[BleedingClaret]

So the enemy is the poor now?

Yes the foot soldiers, It's the perfect disguise

[Yeovil1951]

According to the BBC this started after 10 00 and finished at 10.16 yet this blog started at 9.32 last night Im confused

[BleedingClaret]

According to the BBC this started after 10 00 and finished at 10.16 yet this blog started at 9.32 last night Im confused

Your post says 2.22 but it's was 3.22

[mkmel]

I suspect you're right there, but oppression of gays and women, and the belief that their way of life is 'better' isn't endemic to Islam. That happens across many religions.

But the point is there are good people being persecuted because their beliefs are being associated with evil, and as such they are being subjected to horrible levels of hatred even though they are just as innocent in all this as we are. We can't let that happen.

[mkmel]

How many terrorist attacks have there been by Methodists or Buddhists?

[Spijed]

How many terrorist attacks have there been by Methodists or Buddhists?

I notice you didn't include Catholics.

[ClaretMoffitt]

I notice you didn't include Catholics.

I'm glad you made this point. It's easy to forget amongst all this Islamist terrorism that the real threat we face is actually Catholic terrorism.

[Vegas Claret]

Who decides what amount of "pro isis stuff" one is allowed to possess before it becomes a crime? Can you imagine no reason other than an intent to commit or promote terrorism for someone to possess "pro isis stuff"? I can. For example it could have been confiscated from a family member or by an imam, are they now a criminal? How do they prove they're not? Can an imam not use it to inform himself on the techniques and arguments used in order to help him prevent his flock from being radicalised? Can a journalist not possess it to learn and report tactics used by ISIS which can help inform us all?

Indiscriminently turning everyone into terrorists merely for possession of pro isis propaganda isn't going to prevent extremists from accessing it. They'll just do it anonymously, which they're almost certainly doing anyway. All it will do is turn people who have good intentions into criminals. And what do you think will happen when we start locking up imams who can't prove they possessed it for positive purposes? Do you think those who attended his mosque are more or easier or harder to radicalise when we've imprisoned the guy they looked up to and respected?

you really are far too simplistic, your attitude towards the issue is exactly why we have an issue

[Jenna]

Just a quick one: there's a difference between 'Islamic' and 'Islamist'. It is 'Islamist' terrorism, not 'Islamic' terrorism.

These acts of barbarity were perpetuated by radical fanatics, aka Islamists. That's the link.

[Dazzler]

Just a quick one: there's a difference between 'Islamic' and 'Islamist'. It is 'Islamist' terrorism, not 'Islamic' terrorism.

These acts of barbarity were perpetuated by radical fanatics, aka Islamists. That's the link.

Islamic or Islamists..whatever..
The link is ISLAM


Islam means “submission to the will of God”; adherents of Islam are called Muslims

[Rumbletonk]

If your initial reaction to this news is to post something like Lancasterclaret did in post 8, regardless of your political persuasions, I hope I never have to spend any time in your company.

[Jenna]

Islamic or Islamists..whatever..
The link is ISLAM


Islam means “submission to the will of God”; adherents of Islam are called Muslims

A very simplistic view of it all in my eyes. Radicalisation is the issue that needs to be dealt with, not Islam. Islamists only consider themselves to be sufficiently pious. Other, more moderate Muslims are just as much 'the enemy' as white Westerners.

Islamists hijack aspects of Islam to 'justify' their actions. They use propaganda and media coverage of atrocities committed against Muslims around the world to propagate a sense of injustice in Muslims in different countries that, for a number of reasons, feel marginalised/excluded from their society. They find a place on the internet where people listen to them, feed their sense of injustice, position everything as a moral duty/fight between 'good' and 'evil' and convince them that the only way to deal with it is to go out and kill. They use bits of holy texts etc to help try to legitimise this.

Something needs to be done and I'm not convinced that both bombing the crap out of countries abroad, or locking up/killing people that may or may not be extremists will do anything other than feed into this cycle. Reducing immigration and deporting people may or may not help to reduce the external threat, but we are not being attacked by externals. Until we realise that the issue is people becoming radicalised within our country, and come up with an effective strategy to deal with it (rather than further marginalising Muslims through things like PREVENT) the problem will continue. This is not a leftie, liberal, Islamic-apologist view. It's reality. We need to understand how and why these people become radicalised and take steps now to counter that.

[Dazzler]

Islamic terrorists are not doing anything that is not written in the Koran.

It has been a religion of terror from day one.

[Spijed]

Islamic terrorists are not doing anything that is not written in the Koran.

It has been a religion of terror from day one.

And you think Christianity is all about peace?

I suggest you read the history books about the Crusades.

[Spiral]

You might perceive it to be apologism, Dazzler (and a few others), and thankfully for us all you aren't tasked with providing solutions, but identifying the complexities of Islam and Islamism is essential in understanding how to combat terrorism in an effective way. You're clearly aren't willing to accept this point.

[bfcjg]

No terrorist attacks by Catholics as our faith will excommunicate them and if you believe in such things condem them to hell for going against everything that we are taught. The IRA were a one aim group the unification of Ireland which was split by English\Scottish Protestants hence Catholics supported their aim. The IRA were cowardly **** who used the faith to masquerade their evil operations such as planting bombs in pubs. The filthy vermin though gave a warning when they bombed Manchester what does that make the jihadists who attack children ?

[Dazzler]

And you think Christianity is all about peace?

I suggest you read the history books about the Crusades.

I suggest you read the history books as to why the crusades were launched.

[taio]

And you think Christianity is all about peace?

I suggest you read the history books about the Crusades.

My goodness, what's the point in referring to hundreds of years ago when people are concerned about now and the future for the next generations.

[Spijed]

My goodness, what's the point in referring to hundreds of years ago when people are concerned about now and the future for the next generations.

I was just responding to Dazzler who'd said Islam was a religion of terror from day one. I was just going that far back in history.

[Dazzler]

I was just responding to Dazzler who'd said Islam was a religion of terror from day one. I was just going that far back in history.

May I still suggest you read the history books as to why the crusades were launched.

[taio]

People are rightly concerned about the threats of today i.e. islamic extremism, rather than other religions you've mentioned more than once that don't threaten our way of life.

[ClaretMoffitt]

May I still suggest you read the history books as to why the crusades were launched.

This.

The virtue signallers always use the crusades as a justification for Islamic terror, but are ignorant to, or simply don't care how and why they actually started.

[Spijed]

This.

The virtue signallers always use the crusades as a justification for Islamic terror, but are ignorant to, or simply don't care how and why they actually started.

Ah yes, Christians have never started wars, only defended the innocents.

Btw, you do realise that the KKK are Christians.

[bartons baggage]

This country is sleep walking into a civil war.

[ClaretMoffitt]

Ah yes, Christians have never started wars, only defended the innocents.

Btw, you do realise that the KKK are Christians.

This is 6th form standard rebuttal.

[taio]

Btw, you do realise that the KKK are Christians.

I despair

[RingoMcCartney]

I was just responding to Dazzler who'd said Islam was a religion of terror from day one. I was just going that far back in history.

Let's bring it bang up to date.

Name me one muslim country that has the following.

A free independent press

A free independent tv network.

Tolerance and protection of religious minorities.

Tolerance and protection of gender

Tolerance and protection of ethnic minorities.

Where women are seen as and treated legally as equals.

That doesn't impose a tax on non Muslims simply for being non Muslims.

Where there is no recognised dictator or is effectively a military state.

Which regularly holds free, open and democratic elections.

And here's the kicker. Name an islamic country where all of the above exist AND you'd prefer to live in instead of "islamaphobic" Britain.

Just one........

[Dazzler]

identifying the complexities of Islam and Islamism is essential in understanding how to combat terrorism in an effective way. You're clearly aren't willing to accept this point.

To 'combat' terrorism without combat would mean some kind of appeasement.

[Jenna]

People are rightly concerned about the threats of today i.e. islamic extremism, rather than other religions you've mentioned more than once that don't threaten our way of life.

The fact that people are concerned about Islamist terrorism is an absolutely valid point, but if you lay the blame at the feet of Islam then how do you deal with the problem? Tell people not to believe? Send all Muslims abroad? (How would that even be possible?) Make Islam illegal, forcing them underground where they can't be monitored at all? And regardless of what you do you just marginalise and alienate yet more people, who are then even more vulnerable to becoming radicalised. Without understanding the complexities of the problem we face, regardless of how tempting it is to simply blame Islam, we will never achieve anything.

It is human nature to try to compare this to other things, but we've never faced this type of threat before. It is supranational, deterritorialised, constantly evolving threat and we need to realise that it can't be accurately compared to threats we've faced before.

[WadingInDeeper]

Ah yes, Christians have never started wars, only defended the innocents.

Btw, you do realise that the KKK are Christians.

There's is a difference between starting a war, and claiming God is on your side (even though scripture suggests otherwise) to fire up your largely uneducated army and general population. And radicalising groups of educated people to the extent they believe scripture tells them they are doing God's will.

Likewise the kkk, trying to use gods name to justify their actions, as opposed to believing you are carrying out God's will.

[Greenmile]

To 'combat' terrorism without combat would mean some kind of appeasement.

Ridiculous semantic argument.

How would you "combat", for example, homelessness or teen pregnancy? Give them all a kicking?

[Dazzler]

Let's bring it bang up to date.

Name me one muslim country that has the following.

A free independent press

A free independent tv network.

Tolerance and protection of religious minorities.

Tolerance and protection of gender

Tolerance and protection of ethnic minorities.

Where women are seen as and treated legally as equals.

That doesn't impose a tax on non Muslims simply for being non Muslims.

Where there is no recognised dictator or is effectively a military state.

Which regularly holds free, open and democratic elections.

And here's the kicker. Name an islamic country where all of the above exist AND you'd prefer to live in instead of "islamaphobic" Britain.

Just one........

You missed at least one out Ringo..

A muslim country where christians can march and take over the streets.

[taio]

The fact that people are concerned about Islamist terrorism is an absolutely valid point, but if you lay the blame at the feet of Islam then how do you deal with the problem? Tell people not to believe? Send all Muslims abroad? (How would that even be possible?) Make Islam illegal, forcing them underground where they can't be monitored at all? And regardless of what you do you just marginalise and alienate yet more people, who are then even more vulnerable to becoming radicalised. Without understanding the complexities of the problem we face, regardless of how tempting it is to simply blame Islam, we will never achieve anything.

It is human nature to try to compare this to other things, but we've never faced this type of threat before. It is supranational, deterritorialised, constantly evolving threat and we need to realise that it can't be accurately compared to threats we've faced before.

You won't find any evidence of me laying the blame at the feet of Islam or Muslims. I'm one of the majority who are in that massive space between those who are too tolerant and those who blame anyone they can associated with Islam.

[Claretmatt4]

My goodness, what's the point in referring to hundreds of years ago when people are concerned about now and the future for the next generations.

Common link is a lack of education and a lack of 'enlightenment'

[Jenna]

You won't find any evidence of me laying the blame at the feet of Islam or Muslims. I'm one of the majority who are in that massive space between those who are too tolerant and those who blame anyone they can associated with Islam.

Sorry Taio, I didn't mean for my use of 'you' to refer to you explicitly. Apologies for that.

[Dazzler]

Ridiculous semantic argument.

How would you "combat", for example, homelessness or teen pregnancy? Give them all a kicking?

so people have this notion of sorting out terrorism without combat...how?