| Forum Index > General Forum |
Please attempt to distinguish between extremists and non extremists to avoid starting the inevitable waste of time that is "can Islam be judged by its believers?" - KwarK | ||
|
heliusx
United States2306 Posts
On May 23 2013 04:11 Steveling wrote: If there were healthy young males watching this scene and didn't react due to fear, I'd be really ashamed if I was a brit. The British don't carry around guns. Whatcha gonna do? Engage in some hand to hand combat vs two crazies who have knives? That would be retarded. | ||
|
revel8
United Kingdom3022 Posts
On May 23 2013 04:11 Steveling wrote: If there were healthy young males watching this scene and didn't react due to fear, I'd be really ashamed if I was a brit. The attackers were armed, with knives and at least one gun. They attempted to attack the police when they turned up and got shot by the police. | ||
|
revel8
United Kingdom3022 Posts
On May 23 2013 04:16 heliusx wrote: The British don't carry around guns. Whatcha gonna do? Engage in some hand to hand combat vs two crazies who have knives? That would be retarded. The attackers had a gun as well. At least one. | ||
|
hzflank
United Kingdom2991 Posts
On May 23 2013 04:11 Steveling wrote: If there were healthy young males watching this scene and didn't react due to fear, I'd be really ashamed if I was a brit. British people don't expect the bad guys to have a gun. Even the vast majority of our police are unarmed because criminals here are usually unarmed also. There's not a lot you can do against two guys with knives, a machete and a gun. Maybe someone could of tried to hit them with a car or something, but by that time the kid would already of been dead anyway. | ||
|
Makro
France16890 Posts
| ||
|
ZasZ.
United States2911 Posts
On May 23 2013 04:13 K_Dilkington wrote: You are just writing jibberish. You're right that saying "In Nomine Patris" doesn't make you a Roman Catholic but that's not what I stated. If you kill someone and call on Allah, or the Christian God it's not illogical to assume there's a connection. To automatically assume that someone is trying to decieve is irrational. Where does not assuming anything fall on the scale between the rational and irrational? Assuming these killers can be tied to an entire religion because they uttered two words during their attack is sloppy at best and downright ignorant at worst. Do you have some information we don't as to the confirmed identity of these individuals? Passports, interviews, sworn statements, background checks, etc.? No, you don't. Farv is right in that anybody can say anything for any reason. Taking what two psychopathic murderers say at face value sounds irrational to me. | ||
|
soon.Cloak
United States983 Posts
On May 23 2013 04:14 ZasZ. wrote: Why can't possibility 2 have a motivation? If the motivation wasn't religious, there is no motivation at all? Wouldn't be the first time a psychopath killed someone with little to no motivation, or tried to sow unease and confusion with their actions. There may be a different motive, but I think it's fair to assume that when one screams their motive (basically the case here), they mean what they say. How many times has someone that was not killing based off of Islamic fundementalism screamed Allah Akbar to "sow unease and confusion". And they were waiting around for the police to come. Doesn't seem that they were trying to be manipulative I think I'm with Farv on this one. I don't think we can go off of one hollered proclamation to claim that this is a terror attack by Islamic fundamentalists. At least not yet, and what do we gain by flying off the handle and immediately blaming an entire religion? I don't know if I'm right; I'm making an educated assumption based on (what I feel is) relatively good evidence. We can dispute how good that evidence really is, I guess, but until you can show me other times stuff like this has happened, I'll stick to my assumption While it's a scary story, I see little reason to classify it as a "terror" attack when 1) Only one person was harmed, 2) The suspects have been apprehended, and 3) There has been no indication whatsoever that related criminal activity will follow. It's scary in that it is a brutal story, but people will continue to go about their daily lives. This I think I agree to. Even if it falls under the literal definition of terrorism, it doesn't colloquially. | ||
|
knOxStarcraft
Canada422 Posts
| ||
|
soon.Cloak
United States983 Posts
On May 23 2013 04:21 knOxStarcraft wrote: Religion can cause people who aren't insane to commit acts of insanity, or maybe being religious makes them insane. Not sure if that's the case here, of course, but I wish people would stop trying to defend religion like it's OK. Aww, cmon, we were trying to avoid this turning into a religion thread  | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20316 Posts
Whitness' also say that the two men then "stood around" awaiting for the police to arrive to "confront" them also. Whether this is true is unclear but most news sites/channels are reporting that is the case. When the police arrived a confrontation happened which resulted in the police shooting both suspects Can't say i feel bad about this. It's hard to misunderstand this type of crime. | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
On May 23 2013 03:48 Magic_Mike wrote: Looks to me like these guys want their message to be heard. Stop giving them time on T.V and just report at a very basic level. Soldier murdered in streets. Those responsible apprehended after police arrived. The two men were shot by police and are being treated for their wounds. Giving them all this face time and discussing their motives is doing what they want and is only going to motivate more extremists (regardless of what they are actually extreme for). People will see that these people killed someone and as a result got to have their say. Got to put the message that they wanted to hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of people. This is the most important, yet understated, message of all. TotalBiscuit actually made a video discussing the very subject, delivering essentially the same message(I sadly can't find it). The problem is this: there's money in it. The media has nothing to lose, and everything to gain, by glorifying acts of despicable inhumanity such as this. This feeds into their sensationalist nature for sure, but also inspires other criminals, and would-be criminals, to follow their lead, knowing they'll be seen, knowing they'll leave their mark. Why do they glorify these things, when clearly it brings only harm? Well, why do we not cure certain diseases that afflict us as a species? Follow the money. | ||
|
Steveling
Greece10806 Posts
On May 23 2013 04:18 Makro wrote: we have plenty of that type of guys waiting for a moment like this in europe unfortunately, my condolences for the familiy of the soldier That's sadly true, even here, as peaceful as we are, in the last couple years the islamist immigrants are showing disturbing activity(hence the rise of that fascist party). Why can't we ship em all where they came from? | ||
|
SiroKO
France721 Posts
On May 23 2013 04:10 GeneticToss wrote: I don't know how you can call it Islamic fundamentalism when there is nothing in the Qu'ran that justifies killing innocent people. It just doesn't make sense to me. Call it a radical political sect of Islam if you want but not Islamic fundamentalism. More importantly though, I'm sorry for this soldier's death and I hope justice is done. Islamic faith is not only based on the Qu'ran, besides Takfiri would disagree with you. Takfiri actually believes in a litteral interpretation of the Qu'ran and Sunna, which lead them to murders. So you actually couldn't be more wrong, you are in fact at the exact opposite of the truth. Litteral interpretation of the old testament+talmud and qu'ran+sunna justify murders in all sort of circumstances. | ||
|
SnK-Arcbound
United States4423 Posts
On May 23 2013 04:10 GeneticToss wrote: I don't know how you can call it Islamic fundamentalism when there is nothing in the Qu'ran that justifies killing innocent people. It just doesn't make sense to me. Call it a radical political sect of Islam if you want but not Islamic fundamentalism. More importantly though, I'm sorry for this soldier's death and I hope justice is done. “I have been commanded to fight people until they testify that there is no God but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and perform the prayer, and pay zakat. If they say it, they have saved their blood and possessions from me, except for the rights of Islam over them. And the final reckoning is with Allah”; and the hadith by (Sahih) Muslim, “To go forth in the morning or evening to fight in the path of Allah is better than the whole world and everything in it.” http://www.examiner.com/article/actual-words-of-koran-justify-murder-the-bible-does-not "And fight them until there’s no fitnah (polytheism) and religion is wholly for Allah." "When Muhammad made a peace deal with Banu Nadir and Banu Qurayza and other Jewish tribes, the three leaders of the Jewish tribes were accused by him of breaking the peace treaty. Although he claimed only the three leaders of the tribes broke the peace treaty, Muhammad ordered the beheading of all the Jewish men and boys (who had begun to grow pubic hair). Combatants and non-combatants alike were slaughtered and the remaining women and young children were taken captive by the Muslims and sold in slave markets. This incident took place in the Battle of the Trench. Terrorist use this as justification to attack American civilians.. Omar Bakri used this hadith as a justification as to why terrorism is allowed and why killing of civilians is allowed." As has already been shown, Muhammad's (therefore Islam's) definition of a child differs from a non-Muslims. In Islam a boy who has started puberty is considered an adult. However, for this section we will accept the Islamic understanding. Although Muhammad somewhat disapproved of the killing of woman and 'children', he made a clear exception for non-Muslim woman and children. When he was at war, one of his companions came to him and said they had found children and woman among the dead when they were using catapults. "The Prophet passed by me at a place called Al-Abwa or Waddan, and was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans)." http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Why_Terrorism_is_Allowed_in_Islam | ||
|
EatThePath
United States3943 Posts
On May 23 2013 04:13 soon.Cloak wrote: Not to get too off topic, but the original response was "How incredibly insensitive". Do we agree to that? If we do, then I think we agree that no defense of the first post was necessary. No this is the right train of thought, I'm glad you steered there. My point is that haruhi shouldn't be shushed. His comment does no harm to anyone, and possibly gets someone thinking. It seems at best vapid to point out personal offense, at worst aggressively closed-minded. I also took it as an opportunity to amplify the sentiment: Why do I care? Should this be a focal point? How is it being presented, and is there something missing? I believe you should always ask these questions and take issue with anyone who implicitly dismisses them. I hope that explains it. Note that since the thread was started, the title has changed from "terror attack" to "soldier was beheaded", a factual notification instead of a political viewpoint. | ||
|
soon.Cloak
United States983 Posts
On May 23 2013 04:16 farvacola wrote: Waiting until the bigger picture becomes clear before making associations isn't being PC, it's called being prudent and intelligent in ones' judgment. Deb and Finkelkraut would certainly get along swimmingly though, that much is true. It is illogical to assume that one can properly judge a criminal's intent based merely on a phrase he said immediately after the committal of a violent crime. I guess we just disagree about the significance of screaming Allah Akbar after a murder. | ||
|
DeepElemBlues
United States5079 Posts
On May 23 2013 04:07 Slaughter wrote: Even if they were Muslim, who cares? The vast majority of the Muslim community thinks the same thing about these attacks as the rest of the world. Attacks by radical Muslims just get more play in the media (and they currently are more "active" in their activities due to all the shit going down in the Middle East). But other "terrorists" not affiliated with the Muslim religion still do stuff, its just that whenever a Muslim does something it gets amplified 100x because it plays well in the media. I seem to remember that there was a certain white guy who killed a lot of people in Norway who got a LOT of media coverage. I also seem to remember two certain Muslims in Boston who, before their identities were known, were the focus of a lot of speculation that they were white non-Muslims angry at the government because Tea Party. We should care that they were Muslim because it shows that a certain way of believing Islam plays a large role in motivating violence. The same way we cared (here in the US) about the Branch Davidians (which turned out to be a semi-mistaken concern) or about the Hutaree militia or about the Fundamentalist LDS church, because they were engaging in illegal activity based at least partly on their religious beliefs. | ||
|
Makro
France16890 Posts
On May 23 2013 04:22 Steveling wrote: That's sadly true, even here, as peaceful as we are, in the last couple years the islamist immigrants are showing disturbing activity(hence the rise of that fascist party). Why can't we ship em all where they came from? i don't know but for sure we will have more of this years after years | ||
|
QuanticHawk
United States32078 Posts
i agree on all points but the more active bit. terrorism isnt something that is just isolated to people from the middle east, but it without a doubt it's something more prevelent in that region than other parts of the world, and it's been a big thing there for a while now. it does get more media play than other terrorists would but at the same time, there are a lot more of terrorists come from those regions another non race/religion reason that muslim terrorists get more play than other groups: the scope of a lot of muslim organizations is much more broad than that of other groups. if theyre not more broad, it is shit that strikes a closer to home (US). a lot of muslim terrorist groups list americans, infidels, catholics as their enemies. how many primarily white or at least non-muslim major terrorist groups have a boner for the US, catholics or some other well represented group here? the ira is probably the one major group that everyone. part of the reason they didnt get as much play when they were more active is due to the skin color amkes it hard to depct a 'bad guy'. but part of the reason is your average person doesnt give much of a fuck until you start blowing up people from their country, or start terrorism campaigns that in some was effect them. no doubt race/religion play a role, but that isnt the sole reason that muslims find themselves in the media more | ||
|
knOxStarcraft
Canada422 Posts
On May 23 2013 04:22 soon.Cloak wrote: Aww, cmon, we were trying to avoid this turning into a religion thread Well people seem to be offended when people bring up the possibility that religion is a big contributing factor in this case, which it very well might be. Given that fact, how can we avoid talking about religion at all in this thread? | ||
| ||
|
|
Maestros of the Game
Serral vs herO
Clem vs Reynor
[BSL 2025] Weekly
Replay Cast
BSL Team Wars
Team Bonyth vs Team Sziky
BSL
Artosis vs Sziky
Afreeca Starleague
Soma vs BeSt
Wardi Open
OSC
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Afreeca Starleague
Bisu vs Larva
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
