[News] Lorry attack in Nice

Bold Seagull said:

For 1500 years Muslims and Islam have been in Europe, 45 million or whatever of them now, living mostly happily, integrated throughout our society, from MPs to Doctors, teachers, police. The politics of their homelands, the brutal regimes, the wars we've seen for decades have created a faction of the Muslim world that you simply cannot taint an entire religion with. Anders Breviek killed 77 people, mainly teenagers, he is rightly considered a psychopath radicalised by the far right. Had he been a Muslim we would have seen that tragedy completely differently. But, crucially there is no difference between Breviek and the driver of this lorry. Both easily radicalised by a doctrine of hate, both able to commit mass murder in the name of a belief. The murderer of Jo Cox no different.

Every religion can be driven to extremism, and almost everyone has at one time or another. The language of hate is an easy tool to radicalise if you can present it as the word of God. For some, like Breviek, you don't even need the word of God.

What do you want to happen, 1.6 Billion Muslims all to say, yes our religion encourages us to be violent, when the vast majority are not violent at all? 5 out of the last 12 Nobel Peace Prize winners have been Muslims. It would be like getting 1.2 Billion Catholics to admit that their religion encourages paedophilia.

The denial and excuses are that we expect some kind of convenient answer, that we can just say, oh its this bit from their book, or its migrants, or whatever else to ease our need for an explanation - it would make us feel safer. However it isn't simple is it. Europe lives with 45 million Muslims, and the continent has seen far more violence from separatists, civil or political factions, or just random acts. Of 1000 terrorist attacks recorded in Europe over the past 5 years, less than 2% were connected to religion.

In our lifetimes we've seen what ordinary Christians can be driven to under the stress of violence. I cannot get my head around how we never blamed Christianity for Northern Ireland and yet need to blame Islam for these atrocities? What is the difference? One was more political, but what do you think the middle east is? The paramilitaries found it easy enough to radicalise plenty of willing people to blow up kids and families out shopping on British streets, and it follows another religion finds it just as easy enough to do the same.

If Islam really was a religion of hate, do you not think we'd be seeing wide spread attacks in every city in the world from a population of 1.6 Billion Muslims? Doesn't stack up that conclusion.

It isn't everyone else's fault, because you are never going to find a convenient 'fault' to blame it on. That is a hurdle we need to get our heads around.

Click to expand...

symyjym said:

The difference between Christianity and Islam is that when we trace the origins back to the men they represent, we all know that Jesus never killed or hurt anyone and was never a paedophile to influence the Catholic Church in that way. Even as an atheist I grew up knowing that Jesus was a peaceful man and a good example. Islam on the other hand doesn’t have that luxury of a peaceful and kind role model.

All I have said is that all Muslims have a responsibility to identify and understand the route of the problem in their religion. If you are saying that Muslims don’t have this duty I would strongly disagree.

Do you know much about Muhammad?

Click to expand...

Bold Seagull said:

For 1500 years Muslims and Islam have been in Europe, 45 million or whatever of them now, living mostly happily, integrated throughout our society, from MPs to Doctors, teachers, police. The politics of their homelands, the brutal regimes, the wars we've seen for decades have created a faction of the Muslim world that you simply cannot taint an entire religion with. Anders Breviek killed 77 people, mainly teenagers, he is rightly considered a psychopath radicalised by the far right. Had he been a Muslim we would have seen that tragedy completely differently. But, crucially there is no difference between Breviek and the driver of this lorry. Both easily radicalised by a doctrine of hate, both able to commit mass murder in the name of a belief. The murderer of Jo Cox no different.

Every religion can be driven to extremism, and almost everyone has at one time or another. The language of hate is an easy tool to radicalise if you can present it as the word of God. For some, like Breviek, you don't even need the word of God.

What do you want to happen, 1.6 Billion Muslims all to say, yes our religion encourages us to be violent, when the vast majority are not violent at all? 5 out of the last 12 Nobel Peace Prize winners have been Muslims. It would be like getting 1.2 Billion Catholics to admit that their religion encourages paedophilia.

The denial and excuses are that we expect some kind of convenient answer, that we can just say, oh its this bit from their book, or its migrants, or whatever else to ease our need for an explanation - it would make us feel safer. However it isn't simple is it. Europe lives with 45 million Muslims, and the continent has seen far more violence from separatists, civil or political factions, or just random acts. Of 1000 terrorist attacks recorded in Europe over the past 5 years, less than 2% were connected to religion.

In our lifetimes we've seen what ordinary Christians can be driven to under the stress of violence. I cannot get my head around how we never blamed Christianity for Northern Ireland and yet need to blame Islam for these atrocities? What is the difference? One was more political, but what do you think the middle east is? The paramilitaries found it easy enough to radicalise plenty of willing people to blow up kids and families out shopping on British streets, and it follows another religion finds it just as easy enough to do the same.

If Islam really was a religion of hate, do you not think we'd be seeing wide spread attacks in every city in the world from a population of 1.6 Billion Muslims? Doesn't stack up that conclusion.

It isn't everyone else's fault, because you are never going to find a convenient 'fault' to blame it on. That is a hurdle we need to get our heads around.

Click to expand...

cunning fergus said:

You will have made these points before, apologising and appeasing is the central tenet of your disposition to Islamic terror

Click to expand...

The French government suppressed the media from reporting the gruesome torture of several of the Bataclan terrorist attack victims, it has been claimed.

A government committee has heard from a leading investigator that policemen on the scene of the attacks last November vomited after witnessing victims with their eyes gouged out. They claimed that some had been castrated with their genitals put in their mouths and that women were stabbed in the genitals.

Terrorist attackers were planning on using filmed footage of the torture victims for ISIS propaganda, it was claimed.

Some of the victims were beheaded by the terrorist attackers, according to the claims.

The inquiry heard from the president of the committee, Georges Fenech, that one father had been told while visiting his son's body at the morgue that the right side of his face was unrecognisable because terrorists had 'punctured his eye and sliced down the right side of his face.'

Click to expand...

Guy Crouchback said:

It is also true in case of the French government:



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-told-castrated-eyes-gouged-ISIS-killers.html

French government censors the truth from the public as to not wake up the public from lethargy of how the evil really operates. Just in case the people would demand real action from authorities. Perhaps they think they can win the war on terror with hashtags, protest marches, and colourful chalk.

Click to expand...

vegster said:

Touching and moving tribute at the start of The Proms 2016, they played La Marseillaise before the scheduled program. It's sad that sometimes we can only see how much we share and have in common at times of sadness and tragedy rather than in day to day life.

Click to expand...

Bold Seagull said:

For 1500 years Muslims and Islam have been in Europe, 45 million or whatever of them now, living mostly happily, integrated throughout our society, from MPs to Doctors, teachers, police. The politics of their homelands, the brutal regimes, the wars we've seen for decades have created a faction of the Muslim world that you simply cannot taint an entire religion with. Anders Breviek killed 77 people, mainly teenagers, he is rightly considered a psychopath radicalised by the far right. Had he been a Muslim we would have seen that tragedy completely differently. But, crucially there is no difference between Breviek and the driver of this lorry. Both easily radicalised by a doctrine of hate, both able to commit mass murder in the name of a belief. The murderer of Jo Cox no different.

Every religion can be driven to extremism, and almost everyone has at one time or another. The language of hate is an easy tool to radicalise if you can present it as the word of God. For some, like Breviek, you don't even need the word of God.

What do you want to happen, 1.6 Billion Muslims all to say, yes our religion encourages us to be violent, when the vast majority are not violent at all? 5 out of the last 12 Nobel Peace Prize winners have been Muslims. It would be like getting 1.2 Billion Catholics to admit that their religion encourages paedophilia.

The denial and excuses are that we expect some kind of convenient answer, that we can just say, oh its this bit from their book, or its migrants, or whatever else to ease our need for an explanation - it would make us feel safer. However it isn't simple is it. Europe lives with 45 million Muslims, and the continent has seen far more violence from separatists, civil or political factions, or just random acts. Of 1000 terrorist attacks recorded in Europe over the past 5 years, less than 2% were connected to religion.

In our lifetimes we've seen what ordinary Christians can be driven to under the stress of violence. I cannot get my head around how we never blamed Christianity for Northern Ireland and yet need to blame Islam for these atrocities? What is the difference? One was more political, but what do you think the middle east is? The paramilitaries found it easy enough to radicalise plenty of willing people to blow up kids and families out shopping on British streets, and it follows another religion finds it just as easy enough to do the same.

If Islam really was a religion of hate, do you not think we'd be seeing wide spread attacks in every city in the world from a population of 1.6 Billion Muslims? Doesn't stack up that conclusion.

It isn't everyone else's fault, because you are never going to find a convenient 'fault' to blame it on. That is a hurdle we need to get our heads around.

Click to expand...

Bold Seagull said:

For 1500 years Muslims and Islam have been in Europe, 45 million or whatever of them now, living mostly happily, integrated throughout our society, from MPs to Doctors, teachers, police. The politics of their homelands, the brutal regimes, the wars we've seen for decades have created a faction of the Muslim world that you simply cannot taint an entire religion with. Anders Breviek killed 77 people, mainly teenagers, he is rightly considered a psychopath radicalised by the far right. Had he been a Muslim we would have seen that tragedy completely differently. But, crucially there is no difference between Breviek and the driver of this lorry. Both easily radicalised by a doctrine of hate, both able to commit mass murder in the name of a belief. The murderer of Jo Cox no different.

Every religion can be driven to extremism, and almost everyone has at one time or another. The language of hate is an easy tool to radicalise if you can present it as the word of God. For some, like Breviek, you don't even need the word of God.

What do you want to happen, 1.6 Billion Muslims all to say, yes our religion encourages us to be violent, when the vast majority are not violent at all? 5 out of the last 12 Nobel Peace Prize winners have been Muslims. It would be like getting 1.2 Billion Catholics to admit that their religion encourages paedophilia.

The denial and excuses are that we expect some kind of convenient answer, that we can just say, oh its this bit from their book, or its migrants, or whatever else to ease our need for an explanation - it would make us feel safer. However it isn't simple is it. Europe lives with 45 million Muslims, and the continent has seen far more violence from separatists, civil or political factions, or just random acts. Of 1000 terrorist attacks recorded in Europe over the past 5 years, less than 2% were connected to religion.

In our lifetimes we've seen what ordinary Christians can be driven to under the stress of violence. I cannot get my head around how we never blamed Christianity for Northern Ireland and yet need to blame Islam for these atrocities? What is the difference? One was more political, but what do you think the middle east is? The paramilitaries found it easy enough to radicalise plenty of willing people to blow up kids and families out shopping on British streets, and it follows another religion finds it just as easy enough to do the same.

If Islam really was a religion of hate, do you not think we'd be seeing wide spread attacks in every city in the world from a population of 1.6 Billion Muslims? Doesn't stack up that conclusion.

It isn't everyone else's fault, because you are never going to find a convenient 'fault' to blame it on. That is a hurdle we need to get our heads around.

Click to expand...

Bold Seagull said:

If Islam really was a religion of hate, do you not think we'd be seeing wide spread attacks in every city in the world from a population of 1.6 Billion Muslims? Doesn't stack up that conclusion.

Click to expand...

Bold Seagull said:

In our lifetimes we've seen what ordinary Christians can be driven to under the stress of violence. I cannot get my head around how we never blamed Christianity for Northern Ireland and yet need to blame Islam for these atrocities? What is the difference? One was more political, but what do you think the middle east is? The paramilitaries found it easy enough to radicalise plenty of willing people to blow up kids and families out shopping on British streets, and it follows another religion finds it just as easy enough to do the same.
.

Click to expand...

pastafarian said:

its not a religion of peace that is for certain,there have been attacks all around the world by radical islamic nutters in cities all over the globe.......yet because its not every single city you conclude nothing to be concerned about.......welcome to the world of the permanently ######

Click to expand...

Bold Seagull said:

Don't be ridiculous, we should be concerned with all acts of violence and terrorism, where have I said it is nothing to be concerned about? I have suggested the solution is not simple, that isn't someone who is concluding there isn't a problem. Do I conclude that Islam is a religion of hate? No. Do I conclude that religion can incite people to hate, yes. That was pretty evident in what I said. So head in the sand is pretty much how you read my post. You and others have made up your minds and that is it. No changing them. Closed shops.

Click to expand...

pastafarian said:

admitting islam promotes hate is the first step.....i applaud you

Click to expand...

Buzzer said:

Eye witness reports confirm that the driver of the lorry, who was called Mohamed, was heard repeatedly shouting Allahu Akhbar as he ploughed through the crowd yet still we're afraid to call it as it is - it's Islamic terrorism (again). Case in point, the Independent which ties itself in knots trying not to pin the blame on that murderous death cult.

It's worse than pathetic, it's counter-productive because it fails to address what the problem is - Islam. I'm sick to the back teeth of these denials.

Click to expand...

beorhthelm said:

is the independent in denial? i think its very much tieing itself in knots because what on earth does the liberal democratic west do about it? maybe we could have mass expulsions, but to where, especially for those that are naturalised or born in the west? in the case of this chap in Nice it doesnt look like radicalisation, just a nutter who lost it, so how do you identify that person?

Click to expand...

beorhthelm said:

is the independent in denial? i think its very much tieing itself in knots because what on earth does the liberal democratic west do about it? maybe we could have mass expulsions, but to where, especially for those that are naturalised or born in the west? in the case of this chap in Nice it doesnt look like radicalisation, just a nutter who lost it, so how do you identify that person?

Click to expand...

The Clamp said:

It does look like he's a nutter and likely acting alone, it may be semantics but as he did it in the name of Islam I would say that classes him as radicalised?

Click to expand...