I really don't understand how people can claim these attacks are "nothing to do with Islam", thus absolving this barbaric religion of any responsibility when these bombers are shouting "Allah Akbar" before murdering tens of people.
Allahu Ackbar actually. If Islam didn't exist you would probably find a band of die hard Christians, they'd do the same whilst screaming 'in the name of the father' or something similar.
There is no current strand of Christian ideology at all comparable with modern Jihadism though.
Jihadism of course does not represent or have anything to do with VAST MAJORITY of peaceful Muslims, but it's a globe-spanning ideology with numerous groups nonetheless. Equating it with modern Christianity is absurd.
I compared it to another dimension entirely... One where Muslims didn't exist, hence the bolded text above.
It was NOT equating it with 'modern' Christianity as for the most part, like Islam that is a peaceful religion just with a number of arse holes corrupting young or fragile minds into joining them with books written hundreds of years ago where most have moved their understanding of the books into a modern world, whereas some still don't even wear clothes with two separate fibres.
EDIT: Didn't really explain original point well enough and cba with internet argument.
The way the conflict in Northern Ireland was resolved was to talk to people within the communities where the terrorists were coming from, and find out what they want, why they're doing this and how it can be stopped.
Actually there were two things; the first being the fact that during the mid 90s the economy was strong both in the UK and RoI. If you have a job and a bright future you're far, far, far less likely to be sucked into the world of paramilitary terrorism. Secondly, demographics. The majority of people in NI would soon no longer be of Unionist/Protestant background. The Unionist politicians saw that their days as a demographic majority were numbered and so agreed to come to a compromise with the Nationalists.
The situation in NI was obviously completely different to that involving ISIS and other Islamic terrorist organisations. There were far fewer factors surrounding the Troubles in NI. Pretty much everything going back at least 200 years in the Middle East has contributed in some way to ISIS - it's a LOT more complicated than "the West is to blame"/"Islam encourages terrorism" (delete as (in)appropriate).
I don't profess to be a foreign policy expert at all BTW.
I really don't understand how people can claim these attacks are "nothing to do with Islam", thus absolving this barbaric religion of any responsibility when these bombers are shouting "Allah Akbar" before murdering tens of people.
And people pray before going to war... You can't have it both ways
It could be argued that those who pray before going to war, are indeed going to war for the greater good, because they believe in the mission they are embarking upon is to help many by stopping the few.
There is a great difference between that and those who are mindlessly killing innocent civilians.
No there isn't. That's the horrible problem.
So let me explain that comment to the person - whoever it is - that chose to flag it.
I'm suggesting there isn't a "great difference" between one group of highly-trained, committed individuals who, before going ahead and following their instructions to kill strangers, pray to their God; and another.
I really don't understand how people can claim these attacks are "nothing to do with Islam", thus absolving this barbaric religion of any responsibility when these bombers are shouting "Allah Akbar" before murdering tens of people.
And people pray before going to war... You can't have it both ways
It could be argued that those who pray before going to war, are indeed going to war for the greater good, because they believe in the mission they are embarking upon is to help many by stopping the few.
There is a great difference between that and those who are mindlessly killing innocent civilians.
No there isn't. That's the horrible problem.
So let me explain that comment to the person - whoever it is - that chose to flag it.
I'm suggesting there isn't a "great difference" between one group of highly-trained, committed individuals who, before going ahead and following their instructions to kill strangers, pray to their God; and another.
It's a matter of perspective.
Soldiers acting in a state of war aren't instructed to go into nightclubs or tubes and blow up civilians. Amazed you can't see the moral difference.
I really don't understand how people can claim these attacks are "nothing to do with Islam", thus absolving this barbaric religion of any responsibility when these bombers are shouting "Allah Akbar" before murdering tens of people.
Allahu Ackbar actually. If Islam didn't exist you would probably find a band of die hard Christians, they'd do the same whilst screaming 'in the name of the father' or something similar.
I really don't understand how people can claim these attacks are "nothing to do with Islam", thus absolving this barbaric religion of any responsibility when these bombers are shouting "Allah Akbar" before murdering tens of people.
And people pray before going to war... You can't have it both ways
It could be argued that those who pray before going to war, are indeed going to war for the greater good, because they believe in the mission they are embarking upon is to help many by stopping the few.
There is a great difference between that and those who are mindlessly killing innocent civilians.
No there isn't. That's the horrible problem.
So let me explain that comment to the person - whoever it is - that chose to flag it.
I'm suggesting there isn't a "great difference" between one group of highly-trained, committed individuals who, before going ahead and following their instructions to kill strangers, pray to their God; and another.
It's a matter of perspective.
Soldiers acting in a state of war aren't instructed to go into nightclubs or tubes and blow up civilians. Amazed you can't see the moral difference.
Of course I can! But, from the "perspective" of the other side; following the warped narrative of Daesh and Al Quaeda; seeing it from the point of view of those against whom the west is waging war, it looks different doesn't it?
It fulfills the terrible story promulgated by Islamist extremists.
There's only a "difference" if you see it from one side only.
I'm not going to get into Politics today but all I'll say is I am surprised that Angela Merkel is still in charge of Germany.
She was one of the biggest callers in the EU debates to accept people into Europe yet countless have died in Paris and now Brussels because of it, surely they should be standing down?
all of the Paris attackers were EU nationals and not refugees.
Euhm, ... that's still not clear. Nor is the number of attackers, plotters and those that gave logistical assistance. So please stop that mantra. One guy they caught with Salah Abdeslam is still unknown ... in the world ! Not a single databank has info on him.
Just got in from work after listening to it from the outset on LBC, now watching on Sky news. ALL I can say/think is that after watching and listening from witnesses and from 'mobile phone footage' is that if ANYONE justifies or 'can understand' these cowardly fucking scumbags..................YOU need to crawl back under a stone for another 100/500/1000 years like their beliefs!! OR tell them 'whoever they are' to put on a fucking uniform and fight like 'proper men!!' or even 'proper human beings!'
It just makes me so angry, sad and upset that SO many innocent people, it could have been me or you or your families. What a fucked up world we live in.................................
Thanks for your post in response to mine. Exactly what I wanted to get across. And look up the backstories of most "Islamic" terrorists, including our own, and you will find very similar backstories.
I really don't understand how people can claim these attacks are "nothing to do with Islam", thus absolving this barbaric religion of any responsibility when these bombers are shouting "Allah Akbar" before murdering tens of people.
And people pray before going to war... You can't have it both ways
It could be argued that those who pray before going to war, are indeed going to war for the greater good, because they believe in the mission they are embarking upon is to help many by stopping the few.
There is a great difference between that and those who are mindlessly killing innocent civilians.
No there isn't. That's the horrible problem.
So let me explain that comment to the person - whoever it is - that chose to flag it.
I'm suggesting there isn't a "great difference" between one group of highly-trained, committed individuals who, before going ahead and following their instructions to kill strangers, pray to their God; and another.
It's a matter of perspective.
Soldiers acting in a state of war aren't instructed to go into nightclubs or tubes and blow up civilians. Amazed you can't see the moral difference.
Funny that, I watched a Iraq docu last week where pretty much any actions were justified because of 9/11 and wmds.... Both of which was bollox but used as an excuse
I'm not going to get into Politics today but all I'll say is I am surprised that Angela Merkel is still in charge of Germany.
She was one of the biggest callers in the EU debates to accept people into Europe yet countless have died in Paris and now Brussels because of it, surely they should be standing down?
all of the Paris attackers were EU nationals and not refugees.
Euhm, ... that's still not clear. Nor is the number of attackers, plotters and those that gave logistical assistance. So please stop that mantra. One guy they caught with Salah Abdeslam is still unknown ... in the world ! Not a single databank has info on him.
Why then is it okay to say that the attacks are because of letting in refugees when the evidence so far supports the belief that it was done by EU nationals?
So, there you have it - in 25 years in the US, 94% of terrorist attacks are not related to Islam.
Extremely misleading, considering the significance and devastation of those attacks by other groups are absolutely dwarfed by 9/11 alone.
The facts are misleading?
Chizz, you and I usually agree, but yes.
- 9/11 was by orders of magnitude more devastating than pretty much all of those. Next closest I can think of is the 1995 Oklahoma bombing by Timothy McVeigh, killing ~150
- The last 15 years, politically and religiously speaking, is miles different to a 1980-2005 sample
- It's a little short-sighted to say x amount of terror isn't related to Islam when 1) we're fighting wars and bombing their territory, thereby "taking the fight to them" so to speak [horrendous phrasing I know]; 2) 9/11; and 3) we're only looking at the States from 36 years ago to 11 years ago.
There are better ways to make the point about Islamic extremism, and this is definitely not one of them.
I just scraped up some stats in answer to the question "how many non-islam terrorist attacks have there been?" Admittedly, I could only find 1980- 2005 and not 2001-2016 as requested, but it was an interesting stat nonetheless. In part because it destroys the often-quoted narrative that goes along the lines of "Yes, I know all most Muslims are peaceful, but all terrorists are Muslim aren't they?" Well, no, they're not. As those stats show very clearly.
ISIS are a vile hate group. They are Muslims and are inspired by Islam. No doubt in my mind about that.
Fundamentalist Islamic terrorists are and have been a threat for some time and we need to keep on fighting them and undermining them in every legal and humane way we can. I say that because using illegal and inhumane tactics bring us down to their level.
But when you see a complex issue like this, any complex issue in fact and think you have simple solution you are wrong. There isn't a simple solution.
As an atheist I would happily seen an end to all religions but I don't hate, fear or blame the Muslim who works with me, who serves me in shops or even plays for my football team for what other Muslims do What possible, logical reason would there be for that?
In any case most victims of ISIS and other fundamentalist Islamic attacks haven't been Christians, Jews or atheists but other Muslims.
Why then is it okay to say that the attacks are because of letting in refugees when the evidence so far supports the belief that it was done by EU nationals?
It's Katrien Meire levels of logic.
EU nationals that have possibly been to Syria or elsewhere where extremists are rife and been highly, professionally trained and then sent back through open, porous borders as EU citizens to commit this ideology in home shores.
Not rocket science is it? These people must be in total shock at to how fucking easy it is to get into mainland EU and commit these atrocities.
For the innocents caught up in the events of the past it was a huge personal tragedy and it will be the same again for those so sadly affected by the events of today.
This is a time for commiseration, condolence and support for those innocents who lives have been and will be impacted. There are no words which will ease their pain.
We have seen such atrocities all too frequently across the world be it New York, London, Paris and today Brussels but in truth also in far flung places too many to name across Europe East and West, Asia, Middle East and Africa.
In our life time we will see many more. Inherent to mankind is the capacity for evil.
The Reddit contribution is an excellent piece but it ignores every human being has a mind of their own.
To argue a specific doctrine written centuries ago can be seen as just cause for harming others in the society in which you live ignores the other choices available to human kind. That you elect to pursue such an ideology which effectively places you at war with the society in which you live is a personal choice.
That you may enticed by such an ideology because it offers you a life of eternal prosperity is an arrogant and selfish act. It argues against the basic cannons of nearly all religions.
In this instance such events are designed to create fear, hatred and division between people nothing more nothing less. They are senseless acts of outrage in a cause to create more hatred and division without end. The end choices are submission or death.
Humanity across all creeds, faiths and religions will ultimately never succumb to such depravity.
That the perpetrators will have chosen to attach themselves to a version of a certain religion is ultimately no more than a badge of convenience. A few religious "visionaries" apart the individuals concerned are at odds with the world and in trying to find a meaning for their circumstances have been attracted to a path that not only gives their past struggles and life some meaning but empowers them to change their life with a new future potentially for eternity.
It is of course no coincidence the "visionaries" will profit from and be further empowered by such acts because as with any religion, no matter the spiritual values expounded, with mankind it is about the power and the political influence that can come from such a cause.
In some parts of the world such events will escalate into war and we have all seen the consequences across the middles east notably with Syria. Yet we in the western world have been powerless to prevent a despotic regime from retaining control of large parts of the country due to the support of a Russian executive pursuing its own political interests and agenda.
For those condemning the authorities for not preventing such atrocities they are impossible to stop in their entirety whether you want to hide behind national borders or not will make absolutely no difference. It is no time to wildly lash out or rush to hide.
I too like Prague lived through the IRA campaigns in London. Their campaign was built within the "oppressed" Catholic communities across Ireland and financially supported by the Irish Catholic communities of America, where even today some more extreme 2nd/ 3rd generation Irish Americans spew vitriol at the name of the English.
In truth much of their campaign withered on the prosperity brought in by the development and growth of the Irish economy where many suddenly found they had lives of opportunity and fulfilment to pursue.
It too was a badge of convenience ensuring/ imposing community support on many who neither shared their political or military ambitions. There are some parallels to be drawn. It would have been a very brave Catholic to stand strong against the IRA at its peak. It will take such strength from within the Muslim community to effectively remove/ diminish this blight on their religious community.
The derisory comment from the Brexit supporter is not only appallingly timed but does not stand even the flimsiest of scrutiny. If the UK is intent on focusing its brave new world in markets across the globe in Asia, Middle East and Africa its interest will be even more exposed to local acts of terrorism with even less cooperation and ability to respond.
There is no stable new British "financial empire" to be built. Even if there were we would be in no position to defend it but no one country is under attack here. Western civilisation with all of its ills, is not compatible with the religious ideology being pursued.
To rush behind closed borders at such a time is weak, divisive and isolationist.
The answer is to stand tall with those of shared and common values to defeat such evil.
Why then is it okay to say that the attacks are because of letting in refugees when the evidence so far supports the belief that it was done by EU nationals?
It's Katrien Meire levels of logic.
EU nationals that have possibly been to Syria or elsewhere where extremists are rife and been highly, professionally trained and then sent back through open, porous borders as EU citizens to commit this ideology in home shores.
Not rocket science is it? These people must be in total shock at to how fucking easy it is to get into mainland EU and commit these atrocities.
Exactly how many of these terrorists that perpetrated atrocities in the UK have been EU citizens and by that I mean not British ?
Why then is it okay to say that the attacks are because of letting in refugees when the evidence so far supports the belief that it was done by EU nationals?
It's Katrien Meire levels of logic.
EU nationals that have possibly been to Syria or elsewhere where extremists are rife and been highly, professionally trained and then sent back through open, porous borders as EU citizens to commit this ideology in home shores.
Not rocket science is it? These people must be in total shock at to how fucking easy it is to get into mainland EU and commit these atrocities.
Exactly how many of these terrorists that perpetrated atrocities in the UK have been EU citizens and by that I mean not British ?
Who fucking mentioned British? I said the EU. You just carry on trying to defend this fucking scum. Don't worry your little lovey self because it is coming home to roost, sooner or later. Whether you like it not!
Also, if you don't know by now. If you have a British passport then you are officially an EU citizen, like it or not. That's how it is. In case you hadn't noticed these people are free)due to EU rules)to travel unhindered throughout the schengen area and carry out these mass murders.
Are our Belgian posters like @Skywalker okay does anyone know... Although I guess he's probably in the Liege region?
Thanks for the concern, I haven't heard of a Belgian CAFC follower that lives near the Brussels region. It would've been bad luck that one was present waiting for a flight at Brussels airport. (I live near the point of the red Arrow, so not near Liège also)
For the innocents caught up in the events of the past it was a huge personal tragedy and it will be the same again for those so sadly affected by the events of today.
This is a time for commiseration, condolence and support for those innocents who lives have been and will be impacted. There are no words which will ease their pain.
We have seen such atrocities all too frequently across the world be it New York, London, Paris and today Brussels but in truth also in far flung places too many to name across Europe East and West, Asia, Middle East and Africa.
In our life time we will see many more. Inherent to mankind is the capacity for evil.
The Reddit contribution is an excellent piece but it ignores every human being has a mind of their own.
To argue a specific doctrine written centuries ago can be seen as just cause for harming others in the society in which you live ignores the other choices available to human kind. That you elect to pursue such an ideology which effectively places you at war with the society in which you live is a personal choice.
That you may enticed by such an ideology because it offers you a life of eternal prosperity is an arrogant and selfish act. It argues against the basic cannons of nearly all religions.
In this instance such events are designed to create fear, hatred and division between people nothing more nothing less. They are senseless acts of outrage in a cause to create more hatred and division without end. The end choices are submission or death.
Humanity across all creeds, faiths and religions will ultimately never succumb to such depravity.
That the perpetrators will have chosen to attach themselves to a version of a certain religion is ultimately no more than a badge of convenience. A few religious "visionaries" apart the individuals concerned are at odds with the world and in trying to find a meaning for their circumstances have been attracted to a path that not only gives their past struggles and life some meaning but empowers them to change their life with a new future potentially for eternity.
It is of course no coincidence the "visionaries" will profit from and be further empowered by such acts because as with any religion, no matter the spiritual values expounded, with mankind it is about the power and the political influence that can come from such a cause.
In some parts of the world such events will escalate into war and we have all seen the consequences across the middles east notably with Syria. Yet we in the western world have been powerless to prevent a despotic regime from retaining control of large parts of the country due to the support of a Russian executive pursuing its own political interests and agenda.
For those condemning the authorities for not preventing such atrocities they are impossible to stop in their entirety whether you want to hide behind national borders or not will make absolutely no difference. It is no time to wildly lash out or rush to hide.
I too like Prague lived through the IRA campaigns in London. Their campaign was built within the "oppressed" Catholic communities across Ireland and financially supported by the Irish Catholic communities of America, where even today some more extreme 2nd/ 3rd generation Irish Americans spew vitriol at the name of the English.
In truth much of their campaign withered on the prosperity brought in by the development and growth of the Irish economy where many suddenly found they had lives of opportunity and fulfilment to pursue.
It too was a badge of convenience ensuring/ imposing community support on many who neither shared their political or military ambitions. There are some parallels to be drawn. It would have been a very brave Catholic to stand strong against the IRA at its peak. It will take such strength from within the Muslim community to effectively remove/ diminish this blight on their religious community.
The derisory comment from the Brexit supporter is not only appallingly timed but does not stand even the flimsiest of scrutiny. If the UK is intent on focusing its brave new world in markets across the globe in Asia, Middle East and Africa its interest will be even more exposed to local acts of terrorism with even less cooperation and ability to respond.
There is no stable new British "financial empire" to be built. Even if there were we would be in no position to defend it but no one country is under attack here. Western civilisation with all of its ills, is not compatible with the religious ideology being pursued.
To rush behind closed borders at such a time is weak, divisive and isolationist.
The answer is to stand tall with those of shared and common values to defeat such evil.
Much of their campaign actually withered because they believed that demographic change was coming to Northern Ireland, and they still believe that the 1997 Peace Agreement allows for Irish reunification in the event of a Catholic majority. However I'm not sure it's that much of a priority though anymore for anyone, even Sinn Fein. I did research into this and found that even though 85% of 'Catholics' vote Sinn Fein or SDLP, only about 50% would want a united Ireland tomorrow.
Anyway this isn't about Northern Ireland or Irish history. I think it started out as showing our sympathy to the innocent victims in Brussels. That's the most important thing right now.
Why then is it okay to say that the attacks are because of letting in refugees when the evidence so far supports the belief that it was done by EU nationals?
It's Katrien Meire levels of logic.
EU nationals that have possibly been to Syria or elsewhere where extremists are rife and been highly, professionally trained and then sent back through open, porous borders as EU citizens to commit this ideology in home shores.
Not rocket science is it? These people must be in total shock at to how fucking easy it is to get into mainland EU and commit these atrocities.
Exactly how many of these terrorists that perpetrated atrocities in the UK have been EU citizens and by that I mean not British ?
Who fucking mentioned British? I said the EU. You just carry on trying to defend this fucking scum. Don't worry your little lovey self because it is coming home to roost, sooner or later. Whether you like it not!
Also, if you don't know by now. If you have a British passport then you are officially an EU citizen, like it or not. That's how it is. In case you hadn't noticed these people are free)due to EU rules)to travel unhindered throughout the schengen area and carry out these mass murders.
Hang on. What I'm saying is that those who committed atrocities on the UK mainland have all been home grown British citizens.
Regardless of our continued or not EU membership and its associated freedom of movement they would have still been free to do as you suggest and go to Syria and return. Some did.
Where have I defended these people. I deplore these dreadful acts.
Look at the actual reality of who commit these murderous crimes and not your skewed perspective of it.
It's funny how history repeats itself. We think of terrorists attacking civilian targets as unique to the last 40 or so years when it's not.
About a century ago Europe was rocked by anarchist terrorism. Ideologically driven bearded men bombed theatres, gunned down cafes and even managed to kill several world leaders in the pursuit of their cause. Sound familiar? In fact anarchist terrorists were more successful than their jihadist contemporaries. Anarchist terrorists managed to assassinate Tsar Alexander II of Russia, the French President Sadi Carnot, Spanish politicians Antonio Canovas and Jose Canelejas, King Umberto I of Italy, US President McKinley and the Austria-Hungarian Empress Elisabeth. Despite all these attacks, anarchist terrorism withered into obscurity and I believe the same thing will happen to Islamic fundamentalist terrorism.
This problem will not be solved by the West, Western intervention has and always will be seen as aggressive. Islam has to solve these problems itself. The important ideological battle isn't the one between East and West, it is the fight between East and East, ISIS and groups like it seek to force the world into picking sides. This clash has been going on for the last 20 years and will continue to do so, as shown by the recent bombs in places like Baghdad and Kabul which have left 100s dead. Of course some of this is sectarian but other attacks have been against fellow Sunnis, presumably to force the people to pick sides.
The only way to solve this problem in the long term is to somehow return this dangerous form of Islam back to obscurity, maybe by removing its political driving force. (Another massive subject but I believe a lot of Islamic hostility/instability is driven by political factors, mostly a dislike of the "meddling west" caused by the Sykes-Picot agreement and the 1948 establishment of Israel. If this political hatred disappeared, so would Jihadism.) It would be fair to argue that Islam is expansionist and destructive, certainly the concept of Jihad has played a major role in its history, but by the early modern period, I believe this idea of jihad clashed with the realities of governance and life. The Ottoman Empire (the largest Islamic state) had an extremely large Christian minority, successive sultans realised it would be stupid to force their religion directly on their subjects and so "encouraged" conversion through economic means, they also let Catholic, Syriac, Orthodox and Jewish groups keep their own laws.
During this period, the practical realities of the world meant that the idea of mainstream external Jihad died. Scholars began to pick up on the more "tolerant" elements of Islam such as the Ashtiname of Muhammad. (This was essentially a document supposedly given to a monastery in Egypt by Muhammad himself that granted them freedom of religion, movement and exemption from taxes.) Clearly this relatively liberal document is seemingly at odds with the idea of Jihad, it's almost as if a group of 7th century texts can be manipulated to say anything that you want it to say... Hopefully, in the battle between extreme and moderate Islam, the more moderate elements will win. In the battle of ideologies, more liberal-minded scholars will begin to use the Ashtiname again. Christianity was successfully liberalised to the point that it is not a threat, with any luck Islam will be too.
In the end, terrorist anarchism failed because the allure of joining disappeared, in fact, it became so irrelevant that very few today know it even occurred. Hopefully Islamic terrorism will go the same way.
Comments
The situation in NI was obviously completely different to that involving ISIS and other Islamic terrorist organisations. There were far fewer factors surrounding the Troubles in NI. Pretty much everything going back at least 200 years in the Middle East has contributed in some way to ISIS - it's a LOT more complicated than "the West is to blame"/"Islam encourages terrorism" (delete as (in)appropriate).
I don't profess to be a foreign policy expert at all BTW.
I'm suggesting there isn't a "great difference" between one group of highly-trained, committed individuals who, before going ahead and following their instructions to kill strangers, pray to their God; and another.
It's a matter of perspective.
It fulfills the terrible story promulgated by Islamist extremists.
There's only a "difference" if you see it from one side only.
OR tell them 'whoever they are' to put on a fucking uniform and fight like 'proper men!!' or even 'proper human beings!'
It just makes me so angry, sad and upset that SO many innocent people, it could have been me or you or your families. What a fucked up world we live in.................................
Thanks for your post in response to mine. Exactly what I wanted to get across. And look up the backstories of most "Islamic" terrorists, including our own, and you will find very similar backstories.
Funny that, I watched a Iraq docu last week where pretty much any actions were justified because of 9/11 and wmds.... Both of which was bollox but used as an excuse
It's Katrien Meire levels of logic.
Terriorism's aim is to spread fear and hatred.
ISIS are a vile hate group. They are Muslims and are inspired by Islam. No doubt in my mind about that.
Fundamentalist Islamic terrorists are and have been a threat for some time and we need to keep on fighting them and undermining them in every legal and humane way we can. I say that because using illegal and inhumane tactics bring us down to their level.
But when you see a complex issue like this, any complex issue in fact and think you have simple solution you are wrong. There isn't a simple solution.
As an atheist I would happily seen an end to all religions but I don't hate, fear or blame the Muslim who works with me, who serves me in shops or even plays for my football team for what other Muslims do
What possible, logical reason would there be for that?
In any case most victims of ISIS and other fundamentalist Islamic attacks haven't been Christians, Jews or atheists but other Muslims.
It's Katrien Meire levels of logic.
EU nationals that have possibly been to Syria or elsewhere where extremists are rife and been highly, professionally trained and then sent back through open, porous borders as EU citizens to commit this ideology in home shores.
Not rocket science is it? These people must be in total shock at to how fucking easy it is to get into mainland EU and commit these atrocities.
This is a time for commiseration, condolence and support for those innocents who lives have been and will be impacted. There are no words which will ease their pain.
We have seen such atrocities all too frequently across the world be it New York, London, Paris and today Brussels but in truth also in far flung places too many to name across Europe East and West, Asia, Middle East and Africa.
In our life time we will see many more. Inherent to mankind is the capacity for evil.
The Reddit contribution is an excellent piece but it ignores every human being has a mind of their own.
To argue a specific doctrine written centuries ago can be seen as just cause for harming others in the society in which you live ignores the other choices available to human kind. That you elect to pursue such an ideology which effectively places you at war with the society in which you live is a personal choice.
That you may enticed by such an ideology because it offers you a life of eternal prosperity is an arrogant and selfish act. It argues against the basic cannons of nearly all religions.
In this instance such events are designed to create fear, hatred and division between people nothing more nothing less. They are senseless acts of outrage in a cause to create more hatred and division without end. The end choices are submission or death.
Humanity across all creeds, faiths and religions will ultimately never succumb to such depravity.
That the perpetrators will have chosen to attach themselves to a version of a certain religion is ultimately no more than a badge of convenience. A few religious "visionaries" apart the individuals concerned are at odds with the world and in trying to find a meaning for their circumstances have been attracted to a path that not only gives their past struggles and life some meaning but empowers them to change their life with a new future potentially for eternity.
It is of course no coincidence the "visionaries" will profit from and be further empowered by such acts because as with any religion, no matter the spiritual values expounded, with mankind it is about the power and the political influence that can come from such a cause.
In some parts of the world such events will escalate into war and we have all seen the consequences across the middles east notably with Syria. Yet we in the western world have been powerless to prevent a despotic regime from retaining control of large parts of the country due to the support of a Russian executive pursuing its own political interests and agenda.
For those condemning the authorities for not preventing such atrocities they are impossible to stop in their entirety whether you want to hide behind national borders or not will make absolutely no difference. It is no time to wildly lash out or rush to hide.
I too like Prague lived through the IRA campaigns in London. Their campaign was built within the "oppressed" Catholic communities across Ireland and financially supported by the Irish Catholic communities of America, where even today some more extreme 2nd/ 3rd generation Irish Americans spew vitriol at the name of the English.
In truth much of their campaign withered on the prosperity brought in by the development and growth of the Irish economy where many suddenly found they had lives of opportunity and fulfilment to pursue.
It too was a badge of convenience ensuring/ imposing community support on many who neither shared their political or military ambitions. There are some parallels to be drawn. It would have been a very brave Catholic to stand strong against the IRA at its peak. It will take such strength from within the Muslim community to effectively remove/ diminish this blight on their religious community.
The derisory comment from the Brexit supporter is not only appallingly timed but does not stand even the flimsiest of scrutiny. If the UK is intent on focusing its brave new world in markets across the globe in Asia, Middle East and Africa its interest will be even more exposed to local acts of terrorism with even less cooperation and ability to respond.
There is no stable new British "financial empire" to be built. Even if there were we would be in no position to defend it but no one country is under attack here. Western civilisation with all of its ills, is not compatible with the religious ideology being pursued.
To rush behind closed borders at such a time is weak, divisive and isolationist.
The answer is to stand tall with those of shared and common values to defeat such evil.
Knobheads spreading hate a plenty too.
Not rocket science is it? These people must be in total shock at to how fucking easy it is to get into mainland EU and commit these atrocities.
Exactly how many of these terrorists that perpetrated atrocities in the UK have been EU citizens and by that I mean not British ?
Who fucking mentioned British? I said the EU. You just carry on trying to defend this fucking scum. Don't worry your little lovey self because it is coming home to roost, sooner or later. Whether you like it not!
Also, if you don't know by now. If you have a British passport then you are officially an EU citizen, like it or not. That's how it is. In case you hadn't noticed these people are free)due to EU rules)to travel unhindered throughout the schengen area and carry out these mass murders.
Anyway this isn't about Northern Ireland or Irish history. I think it started out as showing our sympathy to the innocent victims in Brussels. That's the most important thing right now.
Also, if you don't know by now. If you have a British passport then you are officially an EU citizen, like it or not. That's how it is. In case you hadn't noticed these people are free)due to EU rules)to travel unhindered throughout the schengen area and carry out these mass murders.
Hang on. What I'm saying is that those who committed atrocities on the UK mainland have all been home grown British citizens.
Regardless of our continued or not EU membership and its associated freedom of movement they would have still been free to do as you suggest and go to Syria and return. Some did.
Where have I defended these people. I deplore these dreadful acts.
Look at the actual reality of who commit these murderous crimes and not your skewed perspective of it.
About a century ago Europe was rocked by anarchist terrorism. Ideologically driven bearded men bombed theatres, gunned down cafes and even managed to kill several world leaders in the pursuit of their cause. Sound familiar? In fact anarchist terrorists were more successful than their jihadist contemporaries. Anarchist terrorists managed to assassinate Tsar Alexander II of Russia, the French President Sadi Carnot, Spanish politicians Antonio Canovas and Jose Canelejas, King Umberto I of Italy, US President McKinley and the Austria-Hungarian Empress Elisabeth. Despite all these attacks, anarchist terrorism withered into obscurity and I believe the same thing will happen to Islamic fundamentalist terrorism.
This problem will not be solved by the West, Western intervention has and always will be seen as aggressive. Islam has to solve these problems itself. The important ideological battle isn't the one between East and West, it is the fight between East and East, ISIS and groups like it seek to force the world into picking sides. This clash has been going on for the last 20 years and will continue to do so, as shown by the recent bombs in places like Baghdad and Kabul which have left 100s dead. Of course some of this is sectarian but other attacks have been against fellow Sunnis, presumably to force the people to pick sides.
The only way to solve this problem in the long term is to somehow return this dangerous form of Islam back to obscurity, maybe by removing its political driving force. (Another massive subject but I believe a lot of Islamic hostility/instability is driven by political factors, mostly a dislike of the "meddling west" caused by the Sykes-Picot agreement and the 1948 establishment of Israel. If this political hatred disappeared, so would Jihadism.)
It would be fair to argue that Islam is expansionist and destructive, certainly the concept of Jihad has played a major role in its history, but by the early modern period, I believe this idea of jihad clashed with the realities of governance and life. The Ottoman Empire (the largest Islamic state) had an extremely large Christian minority, successive sultans realised it would be stupid to force their religion directly on their subjects and so "encouraged" conversion through economic means, they also let Catholic, Syriac, Orthodox and Jewish groups keep their own laws.
During this period, the practical realities of the world meant that the idea of mainstream external Jihad died. Scholars began to pick up on the more "tolerant" elements of Islam such as the Ashtiname of Muhammad. (This was essentially a document supposedly given to a monastery in Egypt by Muhammad himself that granted them freedom of religion, movement and exemption from taxes.) Clearly this relatively liberal document is seemingly at odds with the idea of Jihad, it's almost as if a group of 7th century texts can be manipulated to say anything that you want it to say...
Hopefully, in the battle between extreme and moderate Islam, the more moderate elements will win. In the battle of ideologies, more liberal-minded scholars will begin to use the Ashtiname again. Christianity was successfully liberalised to the point that it is not a threat, with any luck Islam will be too.
In the end, terrorist anarchism failed because the allure of joining disappeared, in fact, it became so irrelevant that very few today know it even occurred. Hopefully Islamic terrorism will go the same way.