Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Johnoco

London Machete Attack

277 posts in this topic

I agree.

There also seems to be a bit of a flood of 'he was just a regular guy' type features. He's hardly going to tell all and sundry about his real plans is he? Its like when a serial killer is caught and the neighbours all say 'quiet guy....do anything for anyone..etc'

Its called a front.

It's either a front or simply that people are more complex than the media would like to portray them.  Either way, what the current crop of stories reinforces is that there are simply no excuses for murderous behaviour: the only people responsible for it are the people who enact it.  Killers can come from the best or worst of backgrounds but their backgrounds don't turn them into killers.  They do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's either a front or simply that people are more complex than the media would like to portray them.  Either way, what the current crop of stories reinforces is that there are simply no excuses for murderous behaviour: the only people responsible for it are the people who enact it.  Killers can come from the best or worst of backgrounds but their backgrounds don't turn them into killers.  They do.

A cliched cop-out.

 

It's clear that certain backgrounds do predispose people to committing this kind of atrocity. If you go through the backgrounds of killers, you can find similarities and you can put them into broad categories.

 

In the recent cases, you'll find that all the perpetrators will have close connections to groups such as Al Mujaharoon. 25% of those imprisoned for Islamist terrorist offences have connections with Al Muj. Al Muj make up far, far less than 25% of UK Muslims. Therefore there is a connection between the two. Again Muslims make up 2% of the UK population but commit far more than 2% of the terrorist acts even allowing for differences in classification. This is not a coincidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is rather telling that the Muslim Council of Great Britain are less in denial than some forumites:-

 

The Muslim Council of Britain expressed reservations at some of May's proposals. In a statement, it said: "We must be vigilant and ensure we do not inadvertently give into the demands of all extremists: making our society less free, divided and suspicious of each other. Lessons from the past indicate that policies and measures taken in haste can exacerbate extremism.

"We acknowledge that there is a difficult conversation to be had about extremism and the role of our mosques and religious institutions. We have been here before."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If one of these EDL types goes crazy and stabs someone, will he be so casual about the various hate groups that encouraged him to do it? Somehow I think he won't.

No, he'll correctly identify that he was a member of an extremely violent group who claim to represent and defend England. Of course that is no more true of the EDL than it is of Islamists and Islam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, he'll correctly identify that he was a member of an extremely violent group who claim to represent and defend England. Of course that is no more true of the EDL than it is of Islamists and Islam.

So in your world, there are no connections between the EDL and other groups such as the BNP and NF?

 

In mine, there are.

 

If it could be proven that a BNP leader told followers to kill Muslims or set fire to mosques then they would be part of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A cliched cop-out.

 

It's clear that certain backgrounds do predispose people to committing this kind of atrocity. If you go through the backgrounds of killers, you can find similarities and you can put them into broad categories.

 

In the recent cases, you'll find that all the perpetrators will have close connections to groups such as Al Mujaharoon. 25% of those imprisoned for Islamist terrorist offences have connections with Al Muj. Al Muj make up far, far less than 25% of UK Muslims. Therefore there is a connection between the two. Again Muslims make up 2% of the UK population but commit far more than 2% of the terrorist acts even allowing for differences in classification. This is not a coincidence.

How is them taking responsibility for their own actions a cop out? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How is them taking responsibility for their own actions a cop out? 

Because you are glossing over the actions of many other people who take no responsibility for their guilt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is rather telling that the Muslim Council of Great Britain are less in denial than some forumites:-

 

The Muslim Council of Britain expressed reservations at some of May's proposals. In a statement, it said: "We must be vigilant and ensure we do not inadvertently give into the demands of all extremists: making our society less free, divided and suspicious of each other. Lessons from the past indicate that policies and measures taken in haste can exacerbate extremism.

"We acknowledge that there is a difficult conversation to be had about extremism and the role of our mosques and religious institutions. We have been here before."

You did follow the link that was put up that had the Muslim Council of Britain basically telling those Muslims who couldn't abide by British laws to go and find a country that would match their bonkerdom?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You did follow the link that was put up that had the Muslim Council of Britain basically telling those Muslims who couldn't abide by British laws to go and find a country that would match their bonkerdom?

No, I did not.

 

But I don't remember having a go at the Muslim Council of Britain. Back at the time of the London bombing, I described them as worse than the BNP. I stand by that, they were.

 

These days, they are a much better organisation judging by their press releases. Progress has been made but not without "hard conversations".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point is that you asked me to explain what you had written, and I wasn't willing to do that.

No, I did not. I said "sizeable" and was clear what I meant by it. You queried my use of the word so I asked you what you thought the word meant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good move but what's it go to do with Setanu? It seems to me that some Christian religions see militant radical terrorist Islamists as an opportunity to bang the drum for christianity, poking their noses in where they may well not be wanted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, that is not what you said. You used the word sizeable, and were not willing to justify what you meant by it.

 

You stated that a "sizeable" number of mosques were radicalising muslims. Sizeable means "of considerable size". You didn't clarify what you meant by that, and you still haven't.

 

I still contend that you are making it up, and without any evidence from your end, you simply cannot refute that.

'Considerable size' will do me fine.

 

What you seem to want is some kind of accurate statistic like 38.2% of mosques are involved in radicalising muslims. However nobody keeps stats like that hence "sizeable".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A spelling mistake. Nothing more.

:D  Probably the same "spelling mistakes" that

made then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A spelling mistake. Nothing more.

 

You would've thought that before joining a protest group you would make attempts to understand what you were protesting against including the spelling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A spelling mistake. Nothing more.

More likely to be deliberate.  Similar to people who used to hilariously refer to Tony Blair and Tony BLIAR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'Considerable size' will do me fine.

 

What you seem to want is some kind of accurate statistic like 38.2% of mosques are involved in radicalising muslims. However nobody keeps stats like that hence "sizeable".

 

Damn those people requesting accuracy instead of vague, meaningless terms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More likely to be deliberate.  Similar to people who used to hilariously refer to Tony Blair and Tony BLIAR

 

I suspect it's an auto correct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You would've thought that before joining a protest group you would make attempts to understand what you were protesting against including the spelling.

People are idiots.

 

I remember a news story with a British teacher in Burma getting arrested and sentenced to hard labour for handing out leaflets with "There will be peace in Burma because the military are have guns". Perhaps the local language version was better but it didn't seem worth the sacrifice to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Damn those people requesting accuracy instead of vague, meaningless terms.

In the absence of statistics what do you want?

 

"The vast majority of Muslims condemn these attacks" said by very many people.

 

But how often does anyone ask for a definition of "vast majority"?

 

Or "tiny, unrepresentative minority" - never defined.

 

So people are just born to troll.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 born to troll.

 

I'm going to have that on a t-shirt.

 

But, honestly, if you're going to say sizeable or words to that effect you should have *some* basis for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



League Express - Mon 10th April 2017

Rugby League World - April 2017