To blame Islam even for this??

[durezz]

I have just heard about a maniac axeman who has injured more than 20 people going on a rampage on a train. It's horrific and doesn't bear thinking about.
But is it fair that without any details people automatically assume it has something to do with the religion of Islam?

Of all the atrocities happening these days I feel so sad that after every such incident 1.8 billion Muslims are somehow held responsible. Fair?

Just after a general consensus to pick your brains and see is that really how people think?

It's terrible. But it's less terrible than him going on a shooting spree in a crowd or in a mosque. If we had a muscular form of Christianity being widely preached that claimed we were "under siege" and it was his "duty" to go on a crusade, would this guy have done so? Quite likely.

But it's less terrible than him going on a shooting spree in a crowd or in a mosque.

Why? Because he didn't manage to kill anyone, as he didn't have access to a gun?

I don't understand your point about Christianity.

Religion isn't real. It's not an eternal truth. It's a reflection of and a reaction to the society of the time.

^^ well cant argue with that!

Elly we dont have that because Christianity has moved on.

My point is: ideas matter. The ideas put forth by religion matter.

What separates this loser, from the loser on the train or in the truck is that he wasn't furnished with a justification and didn't have his hate geed-up by religion.

That's my point AllTheMadmen.

Christianity isn't a monolith any more than Islam is. Some of it is pretty backwards, but I feel a lot more comfortable pointing out.

I personally think that we need to pick some of these conservative, regressive, misogynistic ideas apart. It's ideas that we are fighting. Not really a specific organisation. Al Quaida was replaced by ISIS, if ISIS goes something else will take its place. We have to win the argument. To win the argument, you have to make the case. To make the case, you cannot be afraid to open your mouth.

Whatever the reasons are for these men becoming radicalised - and attacking / murdering people, it's becoming more frequent and the authorities don't appear to have a grip on it.
As it continues, and probably worsens - communities suffer as people live in fear.
I dont blame the media for this, I blame the terrorists.

lovemyretsis. The way to avoid that is to be like Belgium and France who have banned the niqab and the burka.

Thing is OP - it's fair to say that violence carried out in the name of religion is pretty well dominated by Islam. Certainly at the moment anyway.

But we are not a secular country

I would agree with the banning of the niqab in public buildings (schools, hospital, courts, etc) but not on public space

But then that is restricting religious freedom isn't that oppressive itself. It is but does the niqab have a place in a progressive society where women and girls wearing it become invisible. I don't think it has

But it's not a straight forward argument

Boysdontcry - It may be a man pulling a trigger, driving a lorry or any of the other heinous acts committed, but women are involved too.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/islamic-state/12020844/Why-I-went-undercover-to-investigate-female-Islamic-State-supporters.html

And you're right in saying that there are a lot of male illegal immigrants, but that may be because men make the treacherous journey and then claim asylum if they're lucky enough to make it. If they have been granted asylum their family may then be able to legitimately join them. If you had the choice would you risk putting your children on a boat that will in all probability sink, smuggle them onto a lorry and put them through the horrors of The Jungle?

Thinking that Muslim extremists are responsible for something like this is not blaming all the 1.8 billion other Muslims in the world. It is thinking that lunatics like ISIS,who operate their own twisted,warped version of Islam are responsible.

Enthusiasm Belgium is not a secular country either, but it has banned the niqab and burka.

I don't think having your face covered in Europe is acceptable. If I cover my hair when I go to the ME, and adjust my dress to their mores, then surely the same thing applies here, that they should not cover their faces as we don't. The hijab I can accept, but the face covering I find unacceptable.

"The way to avoid that is to be like Belgium and France who have banned the niqab and the burka." yes two countries who have truly managed integration well. Strange suggestion.

No, Stegfi, I would stay and protect my wife and child and fight for my country, not expect to be given everything on a plate.These are fit young men, why should we support them. And they are traveling through safe countries to get to England. Why, because they know they will be given everything when they get here. More fool us!

Ok I thought Belgium was a secular country

It brings up lots of questions do we want to control how people want to practise their religion

France and Belgium the majority of Muslims there are from or their parents/grandparents were from North Africa where is was not often worn and was banned in some places (governments feared radical
Islam and would try to suppress it) and still is banned from universities (along with young girls wearing a headscarf) in some counties

But the influence is Wahhabism (by the funding of many mosques) has also coincided with the number of women wearing the niqab

I agree it has no place in a progressive society as women become invisible but that quashes religious freedom what government wants to do that

Boysdontcry, well I hope you are never put in that situation where you have to make the choice whether to stay and fight or fight to protect your family and give them the best possible opportunity to survive. I'm sure it's not a decision that any of them made lightly.
Why should they fight for something they don't believe in? There are wars going on in these countries or completely oppressive systems which are totally different to the war that your grandfather fought in.
They're not just getting Speedy boarding passes on the next available Queasy Jet flight. They might be travelling through 'safe countries', but they have to put their trust into the hands of human traffickers, when some could afford to make a safe passage for themselves.
And yes some of them maybe 'fit young men', some of them are incredibly well educated too and would gladly contribute, but the system is broken and doesn't let them.

If an attack generally involves

• assault rifle massacre
• extended/gruesome bladed weapon attack
• suicide bomb vest
• driving into crowds

Then only the bizarrely unobservant will fail to draw the obvious and (in this case correct) conclusion. This is a clear pattern of events. People all over the world have psychological troubles, dark times, grievances, poor conditions. Only Islam provides an instant and easy path to salvation through the murder of westerners.

Shins - Well I'm including domestic terrorism amongst what you obviously classify as Islamic terrorism. Because you only have to google to see that white men (ok I'm assuming here they are not white Muslim men) have killed more people in the UK since 9/11. Which was obviously the dynamite that set off the War on Terror.

The methods used by Islamic terrorists certainly has a pattern. But it's really not that long ago that as a country we were rocked on more than occasion by the IRA - according to Wiki 1841 civilians dead as a result.

So no, I don't think it's naive to say I don't assume Islam. Terrorism is not new.

Well of course they have Felicia since they're in a vast majority numerically. Totally meaningless deflection.

As is your IRA nonsense. Yes, in 30 years.

Shins we don't think "IRA!" anymore than we think "Jacobites!" or "Visogoths!" Time has moved on. And the facts bear out people's perceptions.

It is true that terrorism is still rather minor compared to car crashes, domestic violence, etc. It supports the argument that we shouldn't overreact to what is statistically a minor, though dramatic problem. I believe that people instinctively don't want to do this, not just because of the drama, but because they know it is a movement backed by ideas and values. These things are always more powerful than guns and bombs. When a western airplane is bombed or a crowd is attacked; it is more than just an attack on those particular people it is an attack on western values and the western way of life. It's an attack on identity and values.

Ok, you don't agree. That's fine I don't agree with you either.

"Controlling Islam is as important as controlling terrorism, we need to do both until its decided if its peaceful or not."

How do you propose to control Islam pudding.

Oh dear is someone actually trying to compare the threat posed by the IRA with ISIS and Militant Islam?