To think we should note how quickly the media suggests the causes of attrocities?

[JeremyCunt]

First, and above all, my thoughts are with all those affected by the terrible events in Belgium. I'm so very sorry this has happened.

I think it is notable how quickly the mainstream media suggests who is behind it (this started even before the event - "expect 'revenge attacks' " etc). Facts simply cannot be adequately known at this stage. Certainly there's been no time for any thorough/impartial investigation (not that the impartiality element is likely to ever happen). And yet we're being led quite quickly to certain conclusions ("The attacks come four days after Salah Abdeslam, the main fugitive in the Paris attacks, was seized in Brussels" states the BBC). I'm making no comment about the veracity of these conclusions, but I think they're yet another demonstration of how easy we - the populus - are to lead.

[LagunaBubbles]

Louche, so who else is around that could have planned and carried out todays attack then in your opinion?

[scarednoob]

I do think Muslims need to do more, yes. More to integrate - don't lock your children away in little communities. More to keep an eye on what relatives are doing - alarm bells should go off if they are always online or become more religious. More to condemn extremism - not so much publicly but privately, to counter the brainwashing. More to condemn the hate preachers - make it clear they don't speak for you, and you don't want them at your mosques or universities.

BUT I think the rest of society has just as much to do. More effort to integrate. More effort to understand. More effort to smack down those who are racist and exclusive.

If we don't all work together, we're just going to get further and further apart.

[PageStillNotFound404]

I agree with the OP that there is a general trend for certain branches of the media to speculate and second-guess before facts are known and instances have been mentioned upthread of where they've done so incorrectly, but that doesn't seem to have been the case here and I think this was a poorly chosen example to back up the OP's not-entirely-unreasonable (in more general terms) point.

[LoucheLady]

A) as I've made it abundantly clear upthread I'm not talking about today's attacks as I haven't been following the BBC so don't feel qualified to talk about their reporting. I'm talking about a broader problem with the news being driven by the need for instantaneous information when it would often be better served by waiting until the facts do become clear.

B) Anders Behring Breivik's attacks fit the pattern. He wasn't a Muslim. The Germanwings crash was attributed to Islamic terrorists in the immediate aftermath. The pilot wasn't a Muslim. In this case it seems pretty clear from eyewitness accounts that it was an Islamic suicide campaign, but I don't think that it's a foregone conclusion in the event of similar attacks.

[ollieplimsoles]

I agree with billsykesdog

[LuisSuarezTeeth]

Bill

"Although Shia Muslims take part in the march each year to mark the Arbaeen, or mourning, anniversary of Imam Husain - a seventh-century leader who fought for social justice - this year organisers decided to use the event as a platform to denounce terrorism following the recent Isis attacks in Paris, Beirut and elsewhere." (BBC)

I'm not sure how much clearer that could be.

Regarding your second point, about them being Shia, that makes no sense.

[BeetrootBetty]

Laguna regarding Islamic Terrorists are not Muslims. What I meant was that they may identify as Muslims but the majority of Muslims do not see their behaviour as in keeping with Islam. - just like the majority of Christians don't see Westboro baptist as behaving in a Christian manner.

scared many Muslims do report on things they find suspicious.

[scarednoob]

I know - and thank god for them. But there are others who do not, a tiny minority through complicity, more through naïveté or disbelief or fear. I know it's v unfair and I know it sounds v harsh. But how else is there any chance of trying to stop the radicalisation at source? Nearly all terrorists are homegrown.

[Sallyingforth]

Luis
I was very glad to hear that the march was used to denounce terrorism. It's disappointing that it wasn't publicised more. Perhaps that was because it is an annual event and previously hasn't addressed the violence.

But I am afraid it wasn't going to help. What is needed is spontaneous demonstration of disapproval and disgust whenever these attacks occur. There should be marches from each mosque to the town centre after this Friday's prayers to demonstrate the contempt in which the terrorists are held.

At the moment, the silence looks like tacit approval.

[JeremyCunt]

Sally, how vocal are you about disapproval of the killing carried out/endorsed/funded by Western governments? Or do you tacitly approve?

[Sallyingforth]

I've been very vocal on here and elsewhere about the warmonger Blair, and have attended a Stop the War rally. Does that satisfy you?

[IPityThePontipines]

At the moment, the silence looks like tacit approval.

This mentality is exactly why I won't be taking part in any marches anytime soon. I refuse to apologise for something I did not do.

Anyone with eyes in their head should be able to see that the vast, vast, majority of Muslims are not terrorists, so why on earth should we have to parade through the streets to prove our innocence?

Maybe we should all wear special badges saying "Not a terrorist"? Would that make people happy?

The facts:
The vast, vast, vast majority of Muslims are not terrorists.
Many tip offs to MI5 come from Muslims.
My mosque (one of the largest in the country) prayer calendar has the number to the anti-terrorist hotline on every page. Many mosques are doing similar, along with other grassroots activities.


This is far more useful then making Muslims conduct public acts of contrition for crimes they had no involvement in.

[JeremyCunt]

Sounds good to me, assuming it's spontaneous and whenever these attacks occur. But my satisfaction isn't the main issue here.

[BillSykesDog]

Luis, that march's association with anti-extremism is pretty much like Christmas being rebranded as 'In association with the Socialist Worker's Party' then claiming that anybody who celebrates Christmas must be a Communist. It was a religious celebration which had a message tacked on which people may or may not have supported.

Regardless of that, those marches had an attendance estimated between a few hundred to 2000 people. The Muslim population of Great Britain is 2.7 million. So the idea those marches show any sort of commitment to anti-extremism is laughable. You might as well claim that supporting Manchester United is universal in Islam because you probably have more than that number of Muslims in Old Trafford every Saturday.

The fact that such a pitiful turnout is lauded as a good example of Muslim opposition to extremism shows exactly how feeble that opposition is when nothing better can be found to demonstrate it.

Yet Muslims who oppose opposition to extremism such as Moazzamm Begg, Anjem Choudhury and CAGE and the people who make threats towards moderates like the Qillam Foundation are high profile, noted and able to mobilise supporters to protest quickly and efficiently.

[Sallyingforth]

I'm very glad to hear your confirmation IPity, that the great majority of Muslims in this country are peaceful and hate the violence. I never had any doubt that it was the case.

But as a non Muslim I have to disagree that the silence is helping. I did not ask for contrition, it's not necessary or needed. What I'm asking for is overt condemnation of terrorism so that those who blame Islam as a whole would be disabused.

[ShatnersBassoon]

When did stating the bleeding obvious become unacceptable, or a dull response, or politically incorrect, or whatever it is the op is saying?

I'm genuinely baffled about what the op is getting at.

[BillSykesDog]

This mentality is exactly why I won't be taking part in any marches anytime soon. I refuse to apologise for something I did not do.

As I said earlier. Millions turned out to protest against the Iraq and Afghani wars. They hadn't done anything either, they were guilty of nothing. Yet they turned out to express that they did not support the murder other human beings without justification. By your thinking they should just have shrugged and walked away. Said it wasn't their problem or just complained how mean it was that they were expected to show solidarity with another human being's right not to be murdered. They should have said 'Well I'm not doing the bombing, why should I protest, it's not my fault'.

Are you against, for example UAF marches against fascism? None of the people on those marches are facists yet I don't see anybody saying that they shouldn't be protesting about people who are.

But then saying 'why should we march to prove our innocence' really comes from the sort of sentiment I was referring to earlier. That protesting is not worthwhile unless it is for personal benefit or the benefit of your own group.

Rather than looking for the benefit to you of marching (proving your innocence), why not look to the benefit to humanity in general of opposing murder?

[ShatnersBassoon]

This mentality is exactly why I won't be taking part in any marches anytime soon. I refuse to apologise for something I did not do.

Protesting isn't apologising. It's making a stand against something you strongly disagree with. It's totally unapologetic.

[Potterwolfie]

As soon as something like this happens, the likes of the BBC and ITV, as in, professional journalists with robust standards of newsgathering and a massive network of contacts, will be speaking to sources, experts, local reporters, eye witnesses etc and putting together a picture of what happened, and this will include an idea of who was responsible. They don't just pluck theories out of the air and leap to unlikely conclusions.

[IPityThePontipines]

Do you not see a difference between publically opposing the actions of the democratically elected government of the country you live in

And

insisting that Muslims (and only Muslims) have to march to show their disapproval of the acts of terrorists in other countries, otherwise Muslins apparently approve of those actions. Certainly no one said that only people on anti-war marches opposed the Iraq war, yet you're happy to make that claim about Muslims.

Really?

Bill - you seem convinced that most Muslims support terrorism, despite any evidence to the contrary. That says more about you then it does about Muslims.

[AticAtac]

Translation of Islamic states official claim of responsibility for today's murders (in case you are still in doubt OP )

Statement on the blessed Brussels attack against Crusader Belgium

12th Jumada Al-Akhera 1437

By the grace of Allah and his will alone, a security group from the soldiers of the Caliphate, may Allah dignify it and support it, mobilized in targeting Crusader Belgium, which did not stop targeting Islam and its people, so Allah conquered through the hands of our brothers and cast in the hearts of the Crusaders fear and terror in the very heart of their land.

A group of the soldiers of the Caliphate, wrapped in explosive belts and carrying explosive canisters and machine guns, set out to target sites carefully chosen in Brussels the capital of Belgium, to go inside Brussels airport and the metro station and kill a number of Crusaders, before detonating their explosive belts in their midst, and the result of the attacks was the death of more than 40 and the wounding of no less than 210 of the citizens of the Crusader nations, and to Allah thanks and appreciation.

And we promise the Crusader nations allied against the Islamic State of dark days, in response to their aggression against the Islamic State, that what is coming is worse and more bitter, Allah permitting. Thanks be to Allah for his accuracy and success, and we ask Allah to accept our brothers among the martyrs

[scarednoob]

Oh yeah, because it takes divine powers to walk into an airport full of unarmed people and attack them. Vile.

[Radicalrooster]

This has nothing to do with Muslims.

Islamic terrorists are not Muslims

You're an idiot. An A-grade, copper-bottomed, ocean-going idiot.

[LoucheLady]

the likes of the BBC and ITV, as in, professional journalists with robust standards of newsgathering and a massive network of contacts

And Sky News sends in Kay Burley to interview sad-looking dogs...