Terrorist Attacks - WARNING: CONTAINS DISTRESSING IMAGES

[hypochondriac]

Just now, benjii said:

Is this a joke? There has been plenty.

Western leaders have pointed to extremist Islamic ideology as the problem that needs resolving in order to reduce attacks?

[hypochondriac]

11 minutes ago, benjii said:

Is this a joke? There has been plenty.

Example: https://www.counterterrorism.police.uk/what-we-do/counter-terrorism/prevent/

 

Prevent doesn’t say that at all.

[AlexLaw76]

35 minutes ago, Gloucester Saint said:

They’re just trying to come up with a coherent strategy for the health priorities of Portsmouth tbf…

Entirely sensible... lol

[sadoldgit]

39 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

I think you need to firstly differentiate the deaths of civilians in a war, compared to the deaths of people in a country who is not at war.

Having said that civilians should never be targets and the death of civilians in war is terrible. I don't know enough about the Israel and Palestinian conflict to know the rights and wrongs of land ownership and the detail of the conflict. If the Israeli's were targeting citizens on purpose then that is terrible and politicians should be held accountable. The deaths of children in particular in war is very upsetting and sad.

My problem with having a view on this is that a lot of people profess to understand this conflict but I dont believe they do. Its incredibly complicated and has a long history. I know a lot of people who get very passionate about it but when I ask for an explanation of their knowledge and background it all goes rather quiet. The only person that I know who has been there was a nurse who was helping injured Palestinians. What she said is that a lot of the locals hate Hamas as they make up their military bases within civilian areas and facilities (e.g. hospitals) so that the Israeli's have causalities on their hands as a result of targeting military operations (the human shield tactic). So what I cant differentiate is how purposeful the targeting and deaths of civilians is, bearing in mind the relevant person is the only one who I would say has first hand experience and is relatively impartial. Having said that, having seen the devastation in parts of Gaza, I dont believe that all Israeli attacks are necessary and some of it maybe purposefully destructive.

I'm sure that, despite my attempt at a measured post you are going to get all excited and tell me that I support the deaths of children. I could also ask you why you arent commenting about the deaths of Christians in Nigeria (50,000 since 2009). These people werent at war but have been killed by radicals.

If you want to start a thread about Nigeria go right ahead. I am responding to posts about what is happening in the Middle East and the fall out effects here and in other countries.

[Sir Ralph]

10 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

If you want to start a thread about Nigeria go right ahead. I am responding to posts about what is happening in the Middle East and the fall out effects here and in other countries.

Can I ask why you believe you know a lot about the Israeli / Palestinian conflict? Where do you get your knowledge base from to have the views you have?

Edited yesterday at 13:58 by Sir Ralph

[Lord Duckhunter]

3 hours ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Even the 'moderates' will effectively end your life for ridiculous 'stuff' (as the Batley school teacher)

If only Salman Rushdie hadn’t invaded the West Bank he would have had been ok. 
 

Imagine if Monty Python had made “The life of Mo”. They’d have been under threat, the staff and the cinemas which showed it would be under threat, and most probably anyone who went to watch it. No other religion acts like that in the modern era. 
 

If Israel disappeared tomorrow, do people  think these medieval bigots would just give up killing, would go back to normal lives or be involved in politics like an Arabian Martin Mcguiness  . Of course not, they’d killing our chicks for wearing short skirts, killing comedians for taking the piss or artists for daring to draw their leader, and they’d be murdering Jews for being  Jewish, Of course their useful idiots in the west will still be defending them .  

[Farmer Saint]

38 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

If only Salman Rushdie hadn’t invaded the West Bank he would have had been ok. 
 

Imagine if Monty Python had made “The life of Mo”. They’d have been under threat, the staff and the cinemas which showed it would be under threat, and most probably anyone who went to watch it. No other religion acts like that in the modern era. 
 

If Israel disappeared tomorrow, do people  think these medieval bigots would just give up killing, would go back to normal lives or be involved in politics like an Arabian Martin Mcguiness  . Of course not, they’d killing our chicks for wearing short skirts, killing comedians for taking the piss or artists for daring to draw their leader, and they’d be murdering Jews for being  Jewish, Of course their useful idiots in the west will still be defending them .  

I don't think anyone is arguing that they wouldn't still be killing, are they?

[egg]

1 hour ago, Farmer Saint said:

I don't think anyone is arguing that they wouldn't still be killing, are they?

Indeed. They're not, and his point isn't in context with the discussion or the comments. 

[Farmer Saint]

6 minutes ago, egg said:

Indeed. They're not, and his point isn't in context with the discussion or the comments. 

This forum is so weird. Proper gaslighting just to try to win the internet. 

[hypochondriac]

1 hour ago, Farmer Saint said:

I don't think anyone is arguing that they wouldn't still be killing, are they?

His point is that extremist Islam is a serious problem and would still be a serious problem even if Israel didn't exist. Muslims being persecuted after WW2 isn't to blame for the Charlie Hebdo shooting or Salman Rushdie, it's because people are teaching medieval barbarism and many 'true believers' swallow it. 

[Farmer Saint]

14 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

His point is that extremist Islam is a serious problem and would still be a serious problem even if Israel didn't exist. Muslims being persecuted after WW2 isn't to blame for the Charlie Hebdo shooting or Salman Rushdie, it's because people are teaching medieval barbarism and many 'true believers' swallow it. 

Yes, but we all know that, and no-one has denied that.

[hypochondriac]

4 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

Yes, but we all know that, and no-one has denied that.

Egg said that in his view the reason that Islam is a common factor in all these attacks is because it has been the most persecuted religion since WW2.

[Farmer Saint]

19 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Egg said that in his view the reason that Islam is a common factor in all these attacks is because it has been the most persecuted religion since WW2.

No, he said it was one of the factors - I'm assuming you don't think that persecution of people's can lead to extremism then?

[egg]

19 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Egg said that in his view the reason that Islam is a common factor in all these attacks is because it has been the most persecuted religion since WW2.

Yes, a common factor. I have not said that there would not be killings regardless - that's not been the discussion. There will still be fanatics doing mad stuff, there and would still be excessive interpretation of Sharia law, but there wouldn't be retribution type attacks if there was no reason for retribution. 

Anyone who suggests that there is no link between the mass killings by Islamic extremists and the mass killings of Muslims needs to give their head a wobble. 

[Lord Duckhunter]

Killing innocent people on a beach the other side of the world isn’t a “retribution attack”, anyone who thinks it is needs to give their head a wobble. 
 

Fuck me, could you imagine it if some white lads shot up Muslim’s every time there was an attack by the usual suspects, the apologists wouldn’t be saying “well if other Muslims hadn’t murdered kiddies at a pop concert, if only they hadn’t bombed the underground, or attacked people at London Bridge, if only they hadn’t killed Jews on Bondi beach, this “retribution “ wouldn’t have happened”. 
 

I don’t know what’s worse, Muslims celebrating this barbaric evil event by letting off fireworks, or people trying to justify it and blame other Jews….

[hypochondriac]

20 minutes ago, egg said:

Yes, a common factor. I have not said that there would not be killings regardless - that's not been the discussion. There will still be fanatics doing mad stuff, there and would still be excessive interpretation of Sharia law, but there wouldn't be retribution type attacks if there was no reason for retribution. 

Anyone who suggests that there is no link between the mass killings by Islamic extremists and the mass killings of Muslims needs to give their head a wobble. 

Do we apply that same logic to the likes of Anders Breivik? He believed that his actions were in retribution for the actions of left wing political parties and crimes in Europe committed by Muslims. Surely you could argue that this retributive attack would not have happened were it not for the actions of those governments and the actions of some Muslims and that they had to take their share of the blame? Or do we conclude that the ideology that Breivik subscribed to was evil and wrong and was the primary cause of his actions?

[Farmer Saint]

8 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Killing innocent people on a beach the other side of the world isn’t a “retribution attack”, anyone who thinks it is needs to give their head a wobble. 
 

Fuck me, could you imagine it if some white lads shot up Muslim’s every time there was an attack by the usual suspects, the apologists wouldn’t be saying “well if other Muslims hadn’t murdered kiddies at a pop concert, if only they hadn’t bombed the underground, or attacked people at London Bridge, if only they hadn’t killed Jews on Bondi beach, this “retribution “ wouldn’t have happened”. 
 

I don’t know what’s worse, Muslims celebrating this barbaric evil event by letting off fireworks, or people trying to justify it and blame other Jews….

What a load of Pony.

[egg]

3 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Killing innocent people on a beach the other side of the world isn’t a “retribution attack”, anyone who thinks it is needs to give their head a wobble. 
 

Fuck me, could you imagine it if some white lads shot up Muslim’s every time there was an attack by the usual suspects, the apologists wouldn’t be saying “well if other Muslims hadn’t murdered kiddies at a pop concert, if only they hadn’t bombed the underground, or attacked people at London Bridge, if only they hadn’t killed Jews on Bondi beach, this “retribution “ wouldn’t have happened”. 
 

I don’t know what’s worse, Muslims celebrating this barbaric evil event by letting off fireworks, or people trying to justify it and blame other Jews….

I won't bite on the spouty noise, save that suggesting that anyone is trying to justify the Bondi attack is well out of order.

The sad reality is that you haven't uttered one word against the behaviour of the Israeli regime, or one word of support for the Palestinians. Those that do have sympathy for the Palestinians have all expressed condemnation the Bondi attack as appalling.

I don't think your moral compass is as well aligned as you believe it to be.

Simple question. Do you really think what happened in Bondi has nothing to do with the treatment of Muslims by the Israeli state? 

[egg]

3 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

What a load of Pony.

That's the abbreviated version.

[egg]

5 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Do we apply that same logic to the likes of Anders Breivik? He believed that his actions were in retribution for the actions of left wing political parties and crimes in Europe committed by Muslims. Surely you could argue that this retributive attack would not have happened were it not for the actions of those governments and the actions of some Muslims and that they had to take their share of the blame? Or do we conclude that the ideology that Breivik subscribed to was evil and wrong and was the primary cause of his actions?

No idea.  Not something I've thought about. You may want a wider debate, but I don't. 

[Sir Ralph]

15 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Killing innocent people on a beach the other side of the world isn’t a “retribution attack”, anyone who thinks it is needs to give their head a wobble. 
 

Fuck me, could you imagine it if some white lads shot up Muslim’s every time there was an attack by the usual suspects, the apologists wouldn’t be saying “well if other Muslims hadn’t murdered kiddies at a pop concert, if only they hadn’t bombed the underground, or attacked people at London Bridge, if only they hadn’t killed Jews on Bondi beach, this “retribution “ wouldn’t have happened”. 
 

I don’t know what’s worse, Muslims celebrating this barbaric evil event by letting off fireworks, or people trying to justify it and blame other Jews….

Completely agree. 
 

It’s no justification anyway but who said that Muslims are the most persecuted religious group since WW2 anyway. I can’t find any source which backs this up, if anything the conclusion are that Christians are the most persecuted group in recent decades. @egg

 

Edited yesterday at 17:53 by Sir Ralph

[Farmer Saint]

1 minute ago, egg said:

That's the abbreviated version.

He's a WUM like Nic, hence why I very rarely indulge him.

[Gloucester Saint]

11 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

What a load of Pony.

I can’t see any contradiction in saying that the Bondi attack is vile and unwarranted, carried out by brainwashed brutes from a faith which globally needs urgently pivoting away from aggressive Wahhabi and IRG theories and violence funded since the late 1970s, and saying factually that Netanyahu is pathetic for blaming Albanese for the common sense step of recognising a Palestinian state which has to happen for any faint sliver of peace and settlement for that region to happen. 

Unfortunately the UK and other Western nations selling assets to the Saudis instead of the Chinese isn’t exactly helping this pivot, and neither is MAGA propping up Netanyahu. Both the Wahhabi teaching schools and hardline Netanyahu governments need to disappear for any progress to be possible or the cycle of endless violence accelerates further. Rabin’s assassination was a sliding doors moment. 

Edited yesterday at 17:59 by Gloucester Saint

[egg]

5 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

Completely agree. 
 

It’s no justification anyway but who said that Muslims are the most persecuted religious group since WW2 anyway. I can’t find any source which backs this up, if anything the conclusion are that Christians are the most persecuted group in recent decades. @egg

 

I'm not sure what part of I'm not engaging with you is difficult to understand. 

[hypochondriac]

3 minutes ago, egg said:

No idea.  Not something I've thought about. You may want a wider debate, but I don't. 

Interesting response. I mentioned Breivik because the reasoning is the same. Grievance can be part of the story, but we still treat the ideology — and the individual — as the cause. Applying different standards depending on who commits the violence isn't what we should be doing because otherwise we end up providing something of a justification for horrible extremists like Breivik and I'm sure nobody wants that.

[hypochondriac]

2 minutes ago, Gloucester Saint said:

I can’t see any contradiction in saying that the Bondi attack is vile and unwarranted, carried out by brainwashed brutes from a faith which globally needs urgently pivoting away from aggressive Wahhabi and IRG theories and violence funded since the late 1970s, and saying factually that Netanyahu is pathetic for blaming Albanese for the common sense step of recognising a Palestinian state which has to happen for any faint sliver of peace and settlement for that region to happen. 

Unfortunately the UK and other Western nations selling assets to the Saudis instead of the Chinese isn’t exactly helping this pivot, and neither is MAGA propping up Netanyahu. 

Pretty much agree with that. I'd like to hear more discourse generally about how we encourage a turn away from this version of Islam because it's dangerous and a real threat. 

[egg]

Just now, hypochondriac said:

Interesting response. I mentioned Breivik because the reasoning is the same. Grievance can be part of the story, but we still treat the ideology — and the individual — as the cause. Applying different standards depending on who commits the violence isn't what we should be doing because otherwise we end up providing something of a justification for horrible extremists like Breivik and I'm sure nobody wants that.

It's not "interesting". It's a response that says I don't want a wider debate - I'm focusing on the narrow issue of what happened yesterday and the issues around that. 

On that, could you please answer Farmers point "I'm assuming you don't think that persecution of people's can lead to extremism then?"

[Sir Ralph]

6 minutes ago, egg said:

I'm not sure what part of I'm not engaging with you is difficult to understand. 

Convenient that. No part of my message was aggressive it just challenged something you stated as a fact, which it appears was completely incorrect. 
 

It appears that being challenged is uncomfortable for you. So you have made up something to suit your narrative. Base your comments on fact.

Edited yesterday at 18:05 by Sir Ralph

[egg]

2 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

Convenient that. No part of my message was aggressive it just challenged something you stated as a fact, which it appears was completely incorrect. 
 

It appears that being challenged is uncomfortable for you. So you have made up something to suit your narrative. Base your comments on fact.

I'm not sure what part of I'm not engaging with you is difficult to understand. 

[iansums]

Just now, egg said:

I'm not sure what part of I'm not engaging with you is difficult to understand. 

Yet you continue to engage with him.

[hypochondriac]

1 minute ago, egg said:

It's not "interesting". It's a response that says I don't want a wider debate - I'm focusing on the narrow issue of what happened yesterday and the issues around that. 

On that, could you please answer Farmers point "I'm assuming you don't think that persecution of people's can lead to extremism then?"

But this is relevant to what happened yesterday because your response is that a large part of the reason for the atrocities was the fault of Israel. Of course persecution and indeed many actions can lead to extremism. Given that I've answered your request can you answer a question for me? Do you think that the Charlie Hebdo victims need to take some responsibility for their murder because they depicted Muhammed in a cartoon? They were warned after all and they still did it. 

[egg]

5 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Pretty much agree with that. I'd like to hear more discourse generally about how we encourage a turn away from this version of Islam because it's dangerous and a real threat. 

The truth is we can't. Internationally religion will be taught and practiced in a way that we can't control. We've tried regime change time and time again and it never goes well. Domestically we could perhaps legislate but I'm not sure any government, even Reform, would have an appetite to do that. 

[Sir Ralph]

12 minutes ago, iansums said:

Yet you continue to engage with him.

Funny he was happy to respond to me earlier today. Maybe things got a bit sticky for him....

Also he appears to think that stating something as fact that appears to incorrect, based on what I’ve read, shouldn’t be challenged.  I can only take it as an acceptance of being incorrect. Bearing in mind he could easily explain the source he quoted it seems strange he has clammed up all of a sudden.

Edited yesterday at 18:20 by Sir Ralph

[hypochondriac]

5 minutes ago, egg said:

The truth is we can't. Internationally religion will be taught and practiced in a way that we can't control. We've tried regime change time and time again and it never goes well. Domestically we could perhaps legislate but I'm not sure any government, even Reform, would have an appetite to do that. 

There's obviously things we can do to improve the situation. You're right we don't have control over regimes in other countries but we absolutely could bring in policies that would reduce the risks.

[Gloucester Saint]

Just now, egg said:

The truth is we can't. Internationally religion will be taught and practiced in a way that we can't control. We've tried regime change time and time again and it never goes well. Domestically we could perhaps legislate but I'm not sure any government, even Reform, would have an appetite to do that. 

It’s about the trade and foreign policy levers in part. Governments are desperate for growth to head off the risk from populism but turning to Saudi for that after seeing China’s intentions is literally jumping from the frying pan to the fire. FIFA are accelerating this with the WC going there as part of a sports washing programme.

The current Saudi dynasty tbf are trying to turn away from Wahhabism and pre-October 4 attacks were trying to steer the Palestinians away from Iran to focus on regional economic growth.

Engaging with the Saudis economically but ensuring they are really clamping down on the worst of Wahhabism and closing the schools and training centres down would help in the longer-run. Very long-term project though. 

[egg]

Just now, hypochondriac said:

There's obviously things we can do to improve the situation. You're right we don't have control over regimes in other countries but we absolutely could bring in policies that would reduce the risks.

Domestically yes, but internationally the extreme interpretation of Islam is something that's out of our hands. 

[badgerx16]

( Some random jottings );

This is not a simple matter. It is a fact thst Israel's actions in the West Bank and Gaza provoke retaliation, conversely Palestinian related terrorism provokes IDF action. It's very much chicken and egg. It is a fact that some Islamic theologians preach violence and Jihad, yet predominantly the victims are themselves muslim.  Radicalisation is facilitated by the Internet, and for some people the loudest and most accessible voices are those preaching violence. Until a way is found to effectively counter and shut off the channels promoting such ideologies as ISIS this circular process of violence and retribution will continue.

Intolerance is not exclusive to certain interpretations of Islamic scripture.

[Farmer Saint]

11 minutes ago, egg said:

I'm not sure what part of I'm not engaging with you is difficult to understand. 

Considering you told him this a few days ago I'm not sure how he can see it as "convenient"??

[Sir Ralph]

6 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

Considering you told him this a few days ago I'm not sure how he can see it as "convenient"??

Bit strange he was responding to my posts earlier today then wasnt it. Maybe you can explain on his behalf why he doesnt want to reply now all of sudden? 

Edited yesterday at 18:25 by Sir Ralph

[hypochondriac]

16 minutes ago, egg said:

Domestically yes, but internationally the extreme interpretation of Islam is something that's out of our hands. 

I don't disagree other than we can exert some external pressure along with allies which will make a bit of difference but I accept those changes won't be wholesale.

[whelk]

Some more brave people

Dashcam video shows couple trying to stop gunman before being killed in Bondi attack https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2341yx719o

 

[Gloucester Saint]

What is it with the sick people making videos claiming the Bondi attack was a fake?

[whelk]

21 minutes ago, Gloucester Saint said:

What is it with the sick people making videos claiming the Bondi attack was a fake?

Just like the holocaust 

[hypochondriac]

31 minutes ago, Gloucester Saint said:

What is it with the sick people making videos claiming the Bondi attack was a fake?

Disciples of Candace Owens no doubt. Probably a Jewish psyop.

[Gloucester Saint]

2 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

Disciples of Candace Owens no doubt. Probably a Jewish psyop.

Some of the stuff she’s written about Charlie Kirk’s widow is also staggeringly inappropriate and poor taste.

[badgerx16]

What sort of sick fucker generates AI images of the victims of terrorism then posts them on SM to promote a false narrative of such events having been staged ?