Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

News

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Another terrorist attack

342 replies

Kreeshsheesh · 26/07/2016 10:50

Priest has been murdered. Apparently IS had threatened to target churches in France.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-36892785

OP posts:
allthemadmen · 27/07/2016 13:28

Yes I see your point Baggy and I agree but I would like to point my earlier posts re an Imam praising the murder of a politician in Pakistan over blasphemy. Ergo, the Imam seems to be to be fueling hatred and adovacting violence.

You can see the confusion?

allthemadmen · 27/07/2016 13:29

BTW he is a main stream important Muslim who visits and talks up and down the country and has a huge following.

CharlieSierra · 27/07/2016 13:30

Nothing to do with Islam, nothing to do with being a Muslim

There are a number of very erudite posters on this thread and the previous one after the Nice attack who explain why you are so very wrong. Please read them.

BaggyAndWrinkled · 27/07/2016 13:44

I did read them Charlie.

So are you satisfied in saying that these attackers are representative of Islam? Is that the consensus now?

CharlieSierra · 27/07/2016 13:53

I don't think I or anyone said 'representative'. You said 'nothing to do with Islam'.

Just5minswithDacre · 27/07/2016 13:53

Who remembers the knife attack in the London Underground and when the attacker was disabled by the brave public and police, someone
Shouted "you ain't no Muslim". ?

Everyone should.

Apparently we ALL do need to keep saying it over and over again. So, fine, we will.

I'll say it until I'm blue in the face.

I've got no axe to grind other than that I've had dozens, hundreds of Muslim friends, colleagues and acquaintances all my life and I'm not prepared to watch this ridiculous demonisation shit gain ground in this country. It's fear and ignorance and it's completely wrong Angry

#youain'tnomuslim

Just5minswithDacre · 27/07/2016 14:00

I don't think I or anyone said 'representative'. You said 'nothing to do with Islam'.

Oh come off it Charlie if this was a bunch of white westerners gone rogue and citing a warped political misappropriation of fundamentalist Christianity as their motivation, we wouldn't even be having this conversation. It would just be accepted that they were loonies and colloquially 'nothing to do with Christianity'.

Never mind the semantics of where they are deriving the seed of their warped ideology. It doesn't REPRESENT Islam, it is CONDEMNED by mainstream Islam, it's just NOT Islam.

Can we stop splitting hairs and move onto the sticky issue of how to tackle a cult of self-radicalised terrorists, please?

Which religion they have perverted beyond recognition is so completely NOT the pertinent issue here.

OhYouBadBadKitten · 27/07/2016 14:02

very well said Dacre.

CharlieSierra · 27/07/2016 14:09

Aren't they deriving the seeds of their ideology and the justification for their murderous rampage from their holy book? Which is the final, literal word of God?

Just5minswithDacre · 27/07/2016 14:12

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

BakewellSliceAgain · 27/07/2016 14:26

Just I think you are wrong about the Fundamentalist Christians point.

I'd have no problem saying it.

I have some in my distant family and I'd happily say they ain't no Rowan Williams but I'd never deny they are Christian whatever they did, if that's how they still define their belief. They are not in a hierarchical church you can be excommunicated from.

MistressMia · 27/07/2016 14:29

Just I know you mean well, but you're assertions are completely misplaced re the connection between Islam.

It's telling that pretty much every single ex-muslim holds the opinions I do. It was the main reason for many of us leaving Islam.

Ex-muslim forums and you tube channels are full of us showing the connection using the scripture & doctrines.

I'm no bigot. My whole family save 3 other members are devout muslims.

And as for exposing people to alternative views - you can just see the reaction from the muslim posters on here when confronted with opposing arguments.

For FFS it's not a discussionI can have with my immediate family & they are certain not fanatics in any way, but educated professional intelligent individuals. The subject is just not broachable.

We need to have this conversation and bring it in to the mainstream. You shutting it down is only going to prolong this madness for even longer.

CharlieSierra · 27/07/2016 14:34

Not sure where you got that from Dacre, is what I said about the source of their beliefs incorrect? I don't think it is, but we have to call that semantics? Whilst you remain in denial you can't become part of the solution.

Just5minswithDacre · 27/07/2016 14:37

I wasn't suggesting that fundamentalist or evangelical strands of Christianity* aren't true Christianity bakewell.*

I was just speculating about how society would view a hypothetical cult of white western terrorists, who took some fundamentalist concepts and twisted them into a politicised ideology of hatred.

Inkanta · 27/07/2016 14:41

'Never mind the semantics of where they are deriving the seed of their warped ideology. It doesn't REPRESENT Islam, it is CONDEMNED by mainstream Islam, it's just NOT Islam.'

Alright alright Just - keep your hat on.

How do we counter radicalisation without having these kind of debates.

How do we understand the problem managing terrorism without talking about it and figuring it out.

BakewellSliceAgain · 27/07/2016 14:42

I was telling g you how I would react. There are groups who target abortion doctors already.

CuboidalSlipshoddy · 27/07/2016 14:44

It doesn't REPRESENT Islam, it is CONDEMNED by mainstream Islam, it's just NOT Islam.

So we're told.

Mainstream Islam hasn't condemned the (recently renewed and increased in payout) fatwa n Rushdie; it didn't in 1989, and it doesn't today. Why won't mainstream Islam condemn this? If they are opposed to violence in the name of Islam, what would be the downside?

Just5minswithDacre · 27/07/2016 14:44

Okay charlie, do in my comparison some allegedley 'Christian' terrorists could take some very dark stuff from Deuteronomy or Paul's letters and decide to act on it literally in the modern world, with similar consequences to what we are seeing. Some nutters could make the identical argument that they were acting in a purely scriptural way.

Would you then say the same about the Bible and all Christians? Condemn all Christians worldwide as evil? Condemn Christianity itself as evil?

And what would that achieve exactly?

Just5minswithDacre · 27/07/2016 14:50

You're completely within your rights to critique your religion of origin (if that's the phrase) as hard as you like Mia. I, in my own way, do the same with mine.

What's concerning me here is the difference in the way two religions and two scriptures are being treated.

I can find you both biblical and Koranic verses to apparently condone or justify several bad things. Equally, I could find plenty in both exhorting peace and fairness. I don't see the difference.

Puzzledandpissedoff · 27/07/2016 14:50

If this was a bunch of white westerners gone rogue and citing a warped political misappropriation of fundamentalist Christianity as their motivation, we wouldn't even be having this conversation

But we do have these conversations, don't we? I'm not sure about the "fundamentalist" bit, but whenever the inevitable subject of priestly child abuse has come up, questions have often been asked about what the community knew, what inappropriate influence the clergy may have had on their flock, who covered up for who and much, much more

I wish it wasn't so, but it's hard to avoid the impression that too many simply don't want these atrocities to be discussed at all, or at the very least wish to disallow any reference to the religion the attackers so often claim, however wrongly, to represent

CuboidalSlipshoddy · 27/07/2016 14:53

I was just speculating about how society would view a hypothetical cult of white western terrorists, who took some fundamentalist concepts and twisted them into a politicised ideology of hatred.

There was massive venom directed at Irish Catholics in England during the mainland IRA bombing campaign. Inaccurately, because Sinn Fein are about as not-Catholic as you can get, it was widely assumed that Catholics were supportive of the IRA and vice versa. People like Vincent Nicholls routinely had to condemn the IRA for this very reason.

This was the opposite problem to the one Islam faces: in the case of the Islamic terrorists, they claim to be Muslims, other Muslims disagree, general population lumps them together.

In the case of the IRA, they never even pretended to be Catholic, their ideological position didn't support Catholicism in any substantial way and the cause for which they were "fighting" was entirely political. Gerry Adams couldn't give a shit if the six countries are Protestant, Catholic or Scientologist, his cause was reunification, not conversion.

But it was enough for the general public that they came from a largely Catholic community and (as a first approximation) Catholic/Protestant is a reasonable proxy for Nationalist/Unionist and a better one for Republican/Loyalist (ie, your typical IRA bomber would have been raised Catholic and, if he went to church in between blowing shit up, would have gone to a Catholic one).

If you think that Catholics in British cities, particularly Irish Catholics, weren't held responsible for the bombings by the IRA, I've got some burnt out houses to sell you.

Puzzledandpissedoff · 27/07/2016 14:56

Aren't they deriving the seeds of their ideology and the justification for their murderous rampage from their holy book? Which is the final, literal word of God?

Interesting that you were called a bigot simply for asking this question, Charlie - and so very revealing Sad

MammouthTask · 27/07/2016 14:57

All religions have had their groups who have become extremists unfortunately.
As far as I am concerned, what I am asking us to follow the laws of the country. And invitation to murder (or saying it is right to murder someone) is t lawful as far as I know.
Same with a lot things that we associate with religion (not just Islam)
I'm surevtgatvif we were doing that to start with, we would make a big difference to radicalisation.
The other is address the root cause of the problem. Most of these young men in the West are British/French etc.... They aren't coming from Syria. So what are the reason for the radicalisation? Poverty, MH issues, social problems within their country etc... Let's address that. That will help and a lot if others at the same time

CharlieSierra · 27/07/2016 14:58

some allegedley 'Christian' terrorists could take some very dark stuff from Deuteronomy or Paul's letters and decide to act on it literally in the modern world, with similar consequences to what we are seeing. Some nutters could make the identical argument that they were acting in a purely scriptural way

I wouldn't attempt to deny that they drew the inspiration from the bible if that were the case. However the bible is not widely considered to be the literal word of God. And we are allowed to freely discuss and debate those issues, no one would immediately scream racist, bigot etc. There really isn't a comparison.

Just5minswithDacre · 27/07/2016 14:59

I wish it wasn't so, but it's hard to avoid the impression that too many simply don't want these atrocities to be discussed at all, or at the very least wish to disallow any reference to the religion the attackers so often claim, however wrongly, to represent

Oh I want it discussed. I've got it in the other side of the neck repeatedly for refusing to pipe down about Cologne and join the 'the UK has a rape culture too, you know' irrelevance.

I feel sandwiched here between 'global Islam is complicit in the actions of the terrorists' rhetoric and the (equally incomprehensible) 'it's just male violence, we mustn't mention the Islamism and FGS don't even think about culture' madness.

It's Islamism. NOT Islam, NOT non-specific 'male violence', just ISLAMISM.

A specific murderous ideology outwith mainstream Islam.

They've told us themselves repeatedly. Why is this still being debated? They've told us exactly who they are.

The truth is in the middle, surely?