Discussion in 'Serious' started by rainbowbridge, 7 Jan 2015.
Well, except in the sense that the road to hell is paved with the best intentions.
You fail to distinguish between religious motivations and nationalism. While in Northern Ireland the two groups were identified by their religion, the dispute wasn't religiously based (other than for some extreme Paisleyite sects. I think you'd have trouble finding a Catholic church where you were preached a sermon telling you to go and kill Protestants.
Similarly the conflict in Israel started as a nationalist struggle between two groups Arabs and Israelis rather than Muslims and Jews. Certainly in the current climate that has changed.
In norway we do have a terrorist that identified himself as a Christian. I don't know that they have a problem with "the Christians" as you put it.
And in the US, I think you'll find that by far the most significant terrorist attack was by Al-Queda, now wasn't it? Or have those three thousand been forgotten as a politically inconvenient nuisance?
I totally agree with you: it is easy to misinterpret the different, complicated motivations behind apparently similar behaviour. What seems religiously motivated may turn out to have more complicated reasons and origins. Similarly it is easy to interpret the terrorist actions by different people who claim to have the same faith as being directly motivated by that ideology.
To wit: the Lee Rigby murderers claimed to act out of revenge for Western military actions in the Middle East resulting in the death of Muslim civilians; a political/nationalist motivation. One, Michael Adebolajo, had a strong Christian upbringing with Jehovah's Witness influences before he converted to Islam. He was said to be bright but have a problem with authority if it wasn't his parents or wasn't God. He then developed a political worldview: "It was the Iraq war that affected me the most," Adebolajo told the jury in Court Two of the Old Bailey. "I saw Operation Shock and Awe and it disgusted me. The way it was reported was as if it was praiseworthy, saying. 'Look at the might and awe of the West and America.' Every one of those bombs was killing people.". Yet he was unable to see the incongruity of his own actions. "Please let me lay here," he moaned as a paramedic assessed his wounds after the police had taken him down. "I don't want anyone to die. I just want the soldiers out of my country."
The other had a history of gang involvement from age 14. One significant event was in January 2008, when Michael Adebowale was looking after a flat that was being used as a crack den. Lee James, a professional bare-knuckle fighter and addict, came to buy a hit of crack and then launched a ferocious attack on Adebowale and the two other youths who were with him, accusing them of being Muslim terrorists. James plunged a kitchen knife into the neck of the first youth in the flat. It was sheer chance it didn't kill or paralyse him. Adebowale looked on in terror as the second youth, Faridon Alizada, launched at James to defend both of them. The trial judge would later say it was a "hopeless mismatch" and Faridon was cut to pieces before Adebowale's eyes. Finally, James stabbed Adebowale twice before fleeing the scene.
Lee James was jailed for life for Faridon's murder. Adebowale was convicted of drug dealing - and ultimately jailed for eight months in a young offenders institution. He was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder and began suffering periods of acute mental illness, including delusions, such as hearing voices. He isolated himself and disappeared from his neighbourhood --when he returned much later, he had converted to Islam. This mental decline would come to play a key part in his later trial for Lee Rigby's murder.
The Charlie Hebdo murderers claimed to act in punishment of blasphemous cartoons of the prophet Mohammed: a religious motive. The background of the Kouachi brothers appears on the surface unremarkable; young aimless men in menial jobs drinking and smoking pot, dreaming of being someone more important. We will see.
As I said: people are complicated. What is interesting is that the Lee Rigby murderers did not start out as Muslims. One was a devout Christian; the other a youth adrift. The Kouachi brothers again did not start out as devout Muslims but aimless young men. Similarly the vast majority of Muslims are not terrorists. So you have to ask yourself what it is about some people that they will listen to some firebrand sermons and then decide that it's a good idea to embrace a fundamentalist ideology and go out and kill people. I'll tell you now, it's not the sermons.
Like it's not the violent movies, FPS video games, drugs, pr0n or rock n' roll or whatever else people like to point at as the corrupting influences on our youth today. Like it's not the BNP or UKIP's ideology that makes people racist; rather they already have a pre-existing sense of personal inadequacy and inferiority that causes them to gravitate and find meaning and allies in such political parties.
Maybe it's our thoroughly messy human society, full of corruption, misguidedness and injustice, and parents who, in that world, feel as aimless, lost and desperate as the children they raise.
Well, in the 13 years before 9/11 there has not been a single Muslim terrorist act on US soil. Since 9/11 there hasn't been one since, unless you count the Boston Bombings in 2013 by two White Chechen brothers who claimed to be inspired by radical Islamism but were not affiliated with any such groups. Most terrorist attacks on US soil by far are committed by Christian extremists.
I understand nutters will be nutters. And that all you need is to give nutters an excuse.
It's just that Islam lends itself pretty nicely to be such an excuse. Both my parents are muslim by the way (I am atheist, side-effect of getting an education...). Ask them, and they will condemn the attacks. Most muslims will condemn the attacks however there will be a "BUT". The "but" hanging at the end of the condemnation is on these writers being blasphemus pricks that were looking for trouble.
And this is the real issue. Muslims do not accept freedom of expression. Blasphemy is a sin in most religions, granted, but other religions sort of have grown out of it. However it is properly frowned upon amongst Muslims. So much so that, contrary to common belief, they tend to be fairly respectful of other religions (I am aware of the Buddhitst statues destruction by the Taliban, but that at least was condemned without the "buts").
For me, the real culprits, are the other French newspapers that cowardly refused to publish the cartoons and who are still refusing to do so after these killings. In UK no newspaper published it either. If you cater for this idiocy then you isolate the few that are still holding a candle to the right to blasphemy.
Not true either. There was the original WTC bombing in 1993, and a few incidents motivated by pro Palestinian tendancies, incuding killing a Danish Tourist at the Empire State building in 1997.
The US has the advantage of far more geography separating them from dangerous bits of the world than us and a Muslim-american community that is far more integrated that in Europe. Thus it is far harder for a major attack to be managed there than in Europe.
But there have been a few terrorist killings in the US since
Before we come the the Boston Bombing.
Yes they are unrelated individual terrorists, and yest they all have their own issues, no doubt. But they are all subscribing to some degree to a common ideology so it is sensible to look at this together rather than try to explain them away as individaul issues.
It's not just listening to a couple of dodgy sermons on Youtube, Adebolajo was invoved with al-Muhajiroun ten years before the killing.
None of which were Muslim extremists.
I would disagree about the US being easier to manage geographically. It is vast, less densely populated, and anyone can legally own firearms there... I would say it is a lot harder to manage. As a lot of random shootings testify to: arguably terrorism without a specific ideology.
But you are correct to consider social marginalisation as a contributing variable to terrorism. It has also just been revealed that the Kouachi brothers were orphaned at a young age. Like I said: lost and adrift. See how complicated it is?
I would as an example refer you to this here article. It aptly observes that the media is rather selective in reporting terrorist attacks and may give a skewed impression. I could also point you at random shooting sprees and school shootings; terrorism without ideology.
We know that the terrorists concerned all have certain things in common beyond their ideology, and also that they all are motivated by their own individual issues. You yourself also identified that people can turn to terrorism for all sorts of ideological reasons ranging from nationalism to politics to religion. Finally, we also know that many religious people, Muslim or otherwise, do not endorse nor practice terrorism. I would argue that terrorists all gravitate to a common type of ideology, but also, that not everyone does. It behoves us to ask what all these ideologies have in common, but also what makes some people gravitate towards them while other people do not.
Another issue is what to do about it. You cannot extinguish bad ideas --you simply cannot control what people think. That way 'thought crime' lies. What you can do is teach people to think critically and be emotionally mature, so that they are inoculated against bad ideas with a healthy cognitive and emotional immune system.
I'm sure that this angry lost boy found a sense of belonging with a group that welcomed him with open arms... if it weren't for his rage at the invasion of Iraq he might have ended up with the Jehovah's Witnesses instead.
this reminds me of a conversation I have with a rabid ukip supporter - and a devout Christian.
they did get rather agitated when I mentioned northern Ireland in the 1969 onwards and the battle of bogside....
but no , extremist Christianity surely cant do `bad` things can it....
although as risky said - NI want religious to start with , but after a generation or so the `battle `lines` were drawn between that
They just took hostages in the small city next to mine, already 2 highly injured. Hope this will end soon.
But thats the point Nexxo - he didn't end up as a Jehovahs witness - its another misguided lost individual converting to Islam and fighting in the name of religion - again killing innocents in its name.
The issue I think is Islam almost lends itself nicely as a vehicle to recruit those weak of mind or lacking purpose and puts forth a message so aggressive against other faiths, it is leading individuals to have intolerance for values such as freedom of speech or respect for other faiths.
You have thousands of "extremist" ISIS fighters currently persecuting minority groups of christians and other faiths in IRAQ/SYRIA - There army totals up to 35'000 last I read - Your telling me theres an army of 35k "mentally ill" people out there?.
I'm telling you that there are 35k of people out there with a statistical probability of 80% being brutalised and disenfranchised (most of them have grown up with totalitarian regimes and civil war after all) and 20% being psychopaths. Which is still a tiny section of an overall population that counts 28 million (Sunni Arab population, Syria and Iraq combined).
Unstable people only need a small nudge to topple into the abyss. So yes, Adebolajo might well have ended up being a Jehova's Witness. Instead he ended up with another fundamentalist religious group more resonant with his political rage --one that proselitised a very specific way of expressing that rage.
It is not just Islam that lends itself nicely to recruit the weak of mind; any ideology can do that. PETA for instance shows how a philosophy of being kind to animals can become a fundamentalist ideology that advocates terrorist action. If you think that there are no fundamentalist Christian, Hindu or Jewish terrorists, you have not been keeping up with global events. Can't blame you; if it is not on our doorstep or concerns us in the West, our news doesn't report it.
No, again, you are wrong. I don't get why you are trying to disassociate these acts of terrorism for the ideology and motivations of their perpetrators.
Yes they were certainly the 1993 WTC bombing was organised by Al-Queda trained or linked characters.
The bombings of the embassys in East Africa were also Al-Queda driven.
The Little Rock and Fort Hood shootings and the Boston bombings were all by people that claimed to be motivated by radical Islam.
Could you take your nonsense elsewhere. This forum is called 'Serious'. Try getting your news from souces thar don't think that 'The X-files' was a documentary.
Sorry but i take exception to what seems like you blaming what people like this do on mental health problems, i hope i have misinterpreted.
The fact is people with mental health problems are far more likely to be on the receiving end of violent crime than the perpetrator, just because someone is mentally ill doesn't mean they lose their moral compass.
People with mental health issues are stigmatised enough without someone of your standing appearing to blame extremism on mental health issues, have i misinterpreted what you mean ? If so please clarify things for me.
Ah, sorry, I was thinking of the the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building truck bombing in Oklahoma City in 1995 by Timothy McVeigh.
That one did not occur on US soil.
You yourself admitted that they had "other stuff going on":
Little Rock: Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, previously known as Carlos Leon Bledsoe was raised as a Baptist before he converted to Islam and diagnosed with a delusional disorder.
Fort Hood: Major Nidal Malik Hasan was a regular Muslim whose opinion turned against the United States wars in the Middle East after he heard stories from his patients, who had returned from fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq. Because of his deepening anguish about serving in a military that fought against Muslims, he told some members of his family that he wanted to leave the military but was told he could not (he may have been misadvised). An analyst of terror investigations, Carl Tobias, opined that the attack did not fit the profile of terrorism, and was more similar to the Virginia Tech massacre, committed by a student believed to be severely mentally ill.
At the same time I presented you with ten terrorist actions over the same period committed by Christian fundamentalists. I'm sure that I could list a lot more. But I wonder why you keep trying to associate terrorist action solely with Islam.
Mental illness makes you neither a sinner nor a saint. People with mental illness are good and bad to the same extent that mentally healthy people are good and bad (and frankly most of the 'normal' population has a fairly dodgy moral compass). Generally mental illness makes people more vulnerable so they are more likely to be the victim of violence and crime than the perpetrators. But that does not make them exempt from bad behaviour.
So yes, people with mental illness can harm others. Just visit a Forensic Mental Health Unit. It is rare, and it is often in response to a perceived threat, but it can happen. There are examples of people with severe mental illness harming or killing others, in which that has definitely been a contributing factor. That does not mean that all people with mental illness are prone to such violent behaviour any more than all Muslims are terrorists.
More than 70% of the prison population has a diagnosis of one or more mental health disorders. 20% of the prison population are confirmed psychopaths. This does not mean that people with mental illness are bad people; it is just that people with mental health problems are more vulnerable and therefore more likely to come into contact with crime, do drugs, or exhibit socially unacceptable behaviours that, in the absence of mental health services to contain and support them, cause them to end up in the criminal justice system instead (which does a good job of damaging them more and reinforcing the pattern). Just like they are also more likely to end up homeless or addicted to drugs. Similarly such mentally vulnerable people may also more easily recruited into extremist ideologies and act on them in extreme ways.
However as I mentioned above, terrorists are a very heterogeneous group motivated by a range of interacting variables, of which mental health problems and ideology are but a few. You're not dealing with a single type of person driven by a single factor.
For whatever the Christians, Hindus or Jewish are doing - it is completely overshadowed by the radical islamic extremists in the world right now - by a long shot.
A sweeping statement but almost all major conflict involves radical Islam I would argue right about now; You have Boko Haram in Africa, Extremists in Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq, the fighting along Israel, US attacks, this French attack, the London Bombings, all the plots to cause another major incident which have been intercepted by police have involved...you guessed it - islamic extremists; Why are the police not picking up crazy christians planning to behead someone? Or a car full of birmingham men on their way to blow up a mosque with explosives? - This is the type of stuff extremists are being picked up for right now in our world and I think its a bit blind to say "other religions are doing bad stuff too but its not picked up" - Cause and effect; Perhaps its not picked up because the scale of their misgivings are no comparison to whats happening by radical islam extrmists.
My point is that they are, but you're not hearing about it. Currently Islamic terrorists are certainly the baddies du jour, but the Home Office considers the UK to be under threat of right-wing extremists as much as Islamic fundamentalists. In the US, most terrorist acts are still committed by Christianists.
Another wrinkle is that Western foreign policy has particularly contributed to creating this problem. In the 90's it was deliberate policy of the US to fund the establishment of fundamentalist Madrassa in Afghanistan and Pakistan to raise the next generation of Jihadist "freedom fighters" (there's that word again) who would kick the Soviets out of Afghanistan. The invasion of Iraq and overthrow of Saddam Hussein left a huge power vacuum to be exploited by ISIS. This in turn sparked fires in Africa and East Asia.
If this were the 70's-80's right now, we'd be worrying about left-wing terrorists. Examples of groups include Italy's Red Brigades (BR), West Germany's Baader-Meinhof Gang (also known as the Red Army Faction) and France's Direct Action (AD). These groups wreaked havoc throughout the 1970's, targeting business and political leaders. The most notorious terrorist act was committed by the Red Brigades, when they kidnapped then murdered former Italian Prime Minister Aldo Moro in 1978.
Nearly every Latin American nation has had, or currently has, an active guerrilla or terrorist insurgency. Major Latin American terrorist groups include Peru's Sendero Luminoso (Shining Path) and Tupac Amaru Revolutionary Movement (MRTA), Colombia's National Liberation Army (ELN) and Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), and Chile's Manuel Rodriguez Patriotic Front (FPMR).
Well their were 4 planes with 4-5 Al-Queda extremists on them and Al-Queda claimed responsibility.
Have some respect for the dead and stop dragging up this kooky rubbish.
Separate names with a comma.