BOF Posted May 23, 2013 Moderator Share Posted May 23, 2013 First off, clearly these guys are psychotic; they would be doing this shit even if they didn't have the whole Islam schtick as an excuse. But it does provide them with an easy handle to get their fifteen minutes of fame. As it does for the psychos in the EDL. Ironically, there is a serious point behind it all: their glib comment about how this sort of thing is happening every day in "their" countries is probably true. I'd rather live in London than in Baghdad, or Damascus, or Mogadishu, or Ramala, or [insert lawless city here]. And I don't doubt that atrocities have been carried out by British, European and American troops - they have their share of psychos in the ranks, and are tooled up to indulge their own fantasies. The question is: do you want to make things better, or make things worse? Nelson Mandela had the nous to see that vigilante revenge - even on the actual perpetrators - doesn't work; it just perpetuates the cycle of violence to the point where everybody loses. There can be no winners. And "revenge" on people who aren't even directly involved, but merely taken to be guilty by association, is even more damaging. But of course, they aren't trying to make things better at all. The Muslim fundies have the same millennial mindset as the Christian fundies who just can't wait for Armageddon, and will actively do crazy things in an attempt to bring it about as soon as possible. It's a philosophy that has the perfect appeal to the psychotic.In a way it's a self-fulfilling prophecy. "Armageddon hasn't arrived yet? Then we're not trying hard enough." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 Boris was on the radio telling us that it was nothing to do with Islam and nothing to do with foreign policy, it's just something inside the heads of the perpetrators. That seems so obviously wrong, I can't believe he really thinks that. He surely doesn't believe it was a random attack that could have been done to anyone, just the first person they came across. Perhaps he's saying what he thinks will calm the situation. Semantics. You and Boris are both right. Of course it was "to do with" Islam in the sense that a hooligan stabbing is "to do with" football - it's the environment in which the crime is committed, and it has to be taken into consideration. You lot must know by now that I'd love to see the human race grow out of the divisive and superstitious nonsense that is religion. But we would still have to address the issue of unhinged and bloodthirsty young men, who would simply find another reason to do what they do. I agree Mike, On the same day as this incident Dale Cregen was in court being charged with luring 2 female police officers to a house before shooting them, killing a father and son and trying to kill various other people. I can't imagine the backlash if he had darker skin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 What sane human being hacks someone's head off with a machete? The article linked above by LondonLax has a woman saying that I couldn't see the man's face but I could see no evidence that suggested someone had tried to cut off his head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djamfisher Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 Terrorism = somebody who uses violence, especially bombing, kidnapping, and assassination, to intimidate others, often for political purposes I saw terrorists on the news last night, they of course are nutters because of this.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 Boris was on the radio telling us that it was nothing to do with Islam and nothing to do with foreign policy, it's just something inside the heads of the perpetrators. That seems so obviously wrong, I can't believe he really thinks that. He surely doesn't believe it was a random attack that could have been done to anyone, just the first person they came across. Perhaps he's saying what he thinks will calm the situation. I think the Mayor of London trying to disuade knobheads in the EDL from smashing up Mosques can only be a positive step. His intention is laudable, but what he says lacks credibility. It could not be more obvious that beheading a soldier is not a random act of violence, but is a planned and calculated act with clear symbolic meaning and which is designed to create shock and horror out of proportion to (for example) pushing someone in front of a train. Cameron's comments about this act being at odds with the teachings of Islam, and pointing out that all the main Muslim organisations have condemned it, are likewise meant to calm the situation, but Cameron's statement is true, and Johnson's statement clearly isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djamfisher Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 Tam_uff there is a difference with Cregan and these guys, Cregan is a serial offender, the father and son, supposedly, were rivals, and he was on the run and wanted to carry on his rampage, nd hates polic etc These two nutters have a problem with the British way of life, freedom of speech, women, our ploitical views, armed forces etc. Essentially attacking our way of life. I agree with the darker skin comment, but there are differences in the cases, hence thedifference in rection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keyblade Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 Tam_uff there is a difference with Cregan and these guys, Cregan is a serial offender, the father and son, supposedly, were rivals, and he was on the run and wanted to carry on his rampage, nd hates polic etc These two nutters have a problem with the British way of life, freedom of speech, women, our ploitical views, armed forces etc. Essentially attacking our way of life. I agree with the darker skin comment, but there are differences in the cases, hence thedifference in rection. Well http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/may/02/birmingham-murder-racially-motivated-police'>A 75 year old Muslim man was stabbed 3 times in the back, and died as a result earlier this month. Almost as brutal (considering the circumstances) and for similar reasons. I don't live in the UK, but judging from the fact that I haven't heard about this until today (and only because of this incident), I'd imagine the backlash (if there even was any) was nowhere near the one we're currently seeing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NurembergVillan Posted May 23, 2013 Moderator Share Posted May 23, 2013 (edited) Cregan is a serial offender, the father and son, supposedly, were rivals, and he was on the run and wanted to carry on his rampage, nd hates polic etc He was lobbing hand grenades through people's living room windows, and at policewomen whom HE had called to the scene. He then went and handed himself in. It's every bit as mental as that which happened yesterday, but his "cause"/"reason"/"motivation" - excuse - was slightly different. It was still the gruesome and elaborate murder of someone innocent who represented something the offender didn't like. Don't like soldiers? Chop the head off one. Don't like cops? Chuck a grenade at one. A key indicator in the difference in mindset of the general public to the offences can be seen in that the EDL turned up in Woolwich and chucked bricks and bottles at the police. In the Cregan tale it was the police who were the victims. Edited May 23, 2013 by NurembergVillan 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djamfisher Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 Nuermberg I totally agree, maybe i didn't articulate my point very well, but I do think the slight differences, in the motivation has caused a different reaction. Like I said the darker skin comment is totally correct. Racism clearly runs deeper in society than a lot of people like to admit. Key barely any backlash, don't even remember it making national news. THe only diference, and it's a minor detail (playing Devil's advocate), would be that the bloke has been filmed telling the world what the motive's of yesterdays attack were, and that hits home with everyone, whereas the one in Brum, was at the dead of night, and no one knows for certain what has happened cause the investigation is early on, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 Tommy Robinson of the EDL thinks that if Salman Rushdie had worn a balaclava (presumably while typing The Satanic Verses), he'd "still be alive". Thanks for that insight, Tom. As for van Gogh, I suppose the thinking is that if he'd only worn a balaclava, he'd never have cut off his ear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coda Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 I think Theo van Gogh was decapitated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 Rushdie is dead? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 Hmmmm? Tommy Robinson EDL @EDLTrobinson 5h Who could u trust to tackle Islamist extremism? Cameron? Clegg? Milliband? And they wonder y ukip have seen a surge in support #farage Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 I tell you what - he's gone downhill since 2 4 6 8 motorway. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 First off, clearly these guys are psychotic; they would be doing this shit even if they didn't have the whole Islam schtick as an excuse. But it does provide them with an easy handle to get their fifteen minutes of fame. As it does for the psychos in the EDL. Ironically, there is a serious point behind it all: their glib comment about how this sort of thing is happening every day in "their" countries is probably true. I'd rather live in London than in Baghdad, or Damascus, or Mogadishu, or Ramala, or [insert lawless city here]. And I don't doubt that atrocities have been carried out by British, European and American troops - they have their share of psychos in the ranks, and are tooled up to indulge their own fantasies. The question is: do you want to make things better, or make things worse? Nelson Mandela had the nous to see that vigilante revenge - even on the actual perpetrators - doesn't work; it just perpetuates the cycle of violence to the point where everybody loses. There can be no winners. And "revenge" on people who aren't even directly involved, but merely taken to be guilty by association, is even more damaging. But of course, they aren't trying to make things better at all. The Muslim fundies have the same millennial mindset as the Christian fundies who just can't wait for Armageddon, and will actively do crazy things in an attempt to bring it about as soon as possible. It's a philosophy that has the perfect appeal to the psychotic. There is no easy solution - stringing them up by the balls may be tempting, but all it does is ratchet up the stakes. In the face of all this shit, be good, be kind - and put your faith in education. It's going to be a long haul. Any eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. - Gandhi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choffer Posted May 23, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted May 23, 2013 Any eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.- Gandhi Apart from the last bloke. But I think we've been through this recently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 Rushdie is dead? No, he's not. Tommy thinks he is, but the bit I don't follow is how a balaclava would make a difference... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 Rushdie is dead? No, he's not. Tommy thinks he is, but the bit I don't follow is how a balaclava would make a difference... The point he is trying to make (quite poorly) is that he and some of his members fear deadly reprisal attacks for insulting Islam so they wear balaclavas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted May 23, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted May 23, 2013 Roy Harper has never worn a balaclava: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tzr5CrSJK7w 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 How will a Greek pudding save you from being attacked? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts