Jump to content

Theresa May calls for tougher penalties


John52

Recommended Posts

.. but how can you have tougher penalties for suicide bombers?

I haven't a clue what makes them do t. But it seems to me thats something we need to understand before we can deal with it.

Not fashionable to talk about understanding terrorists though is it?

You'll probably get labelled a Terrorist Sympathiser like Jeremy Corbyn *-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 68
  • Created
  • Last Reply
John52 - 2017-06-05 8:58 AM

 

Another thing I don't understand is her calling them Cowards.

Lunatics Yes.

But Cowards?

 

Heroes sound better ??? ... Give em medals like McDonnell says we should give IRA soldiers ... If stabbing unarmed women and blowing up innocent children isn't cowardly then I don't know what is

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PJay - 2017-06-05 9:18 AM

 

John52 - 2017-06-05 8:44 AM

 

.. but how can you have tougher penalties for suicide bombers?

I haven't a clue what makes them do t. *-)

 

ALLAH !!

 

I'm still none the wiser.

But talk of 'Cowards' and 'Tougher Penalties' suggests to me the Prime Minister doesn't understand it either, and is just saying what she thinks we want to hear . :-(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

antony1969 - 2017-06-05 9:20 AM

 

John52 - 2017-06-05 8:58 AM

 

Another thing I don't understand is her calling them Cowards.

Lunatics Yes.

But Cowards?

 

Heroes sound better ??? ... Give em medals like McDonnell says we should give IRA soldiers ... If stabbing unarmed women and blowing up innocent children isn't cowardly then I don't know what is

Sadly thats the reaction you get for just trying to understand what makes them do it. No wonder some politicians prefer to say what they think you want to hear.

 

Googling the meaning of 'Coward' I get

 

'a person who is contemptibly lacking in the courage to do or endure dangerous or unpleasant things.'

 

Is that an accurate description of them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John52 - 2017-06-05 9:29 AM

 

antony1969 - 2017-06-05 9:20 AM

 

John52 - 2017-06-05 8:58 AM

 

Another thing I don't understand is her calling them Cowards.

Lunatics Yes.

But Cowards?

 

Heroes sound better ??? ... Give em medals like McDonnell says we should give IRA soldiers ... If stabbing unarmed women and blowing up innocent children isn't cowardly then I don't know what is

Sadly thats the reaction you get for just trying to understand what makes them do it. No wonder some politicians prefer to say what they think you want to hear.

 

Googling the meaning of 'Coward' I get

'a person who is contemptibly lacking in the courage to do or endure dangerous or unpleasant things.'

Is that what they are?

 

We've had innocent slaughter again and all your concerned about is our PMs use of the word coward

Link to comment
Share on other sites

antony1969 - 2017-06-05 9:32 AM

We've had innocent slaughter again and all your concerned about is our PMs use of the word coward

 

I'm concerned about the PM not understanding what makes them do it.

How can we deal with them without understanding that?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John52 - 2017-06-05 9:36 AM

 

antony1969 - 2017-06-05 9:32 AM

We've had innocent slaughter again and all your concerned about is our PMs use of the word coward

 

I'm concerned about the PM not understanding what makes them do it.

How can we deal with them without understanding that?

 

Whats not to understand or get confused over ... Like an Islamic expert said on the radio this morning they want non-believers to surrender to a greater God , the only God and what they do is in the name of the Islamic faith ... The only politician saying it like it really is would be Paul Nuttall but he's just an old racist isn't he ... Im sure the PM understands what makes them do it but in our PC world its how to say it without getting shot down

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John52 - 2017-06-05 8:44 AM

 

.. but how can you have tougher penalties for suicide bombers?

 

It's a bit late once they've gone pop but I am aware that there are many dozens of suicide bombers (worldwide) which are currently serving life sentences, i.e. where their devices failed to activate and where they were subsequently caught by the authorities or where they changed their minds (last minute, and detained) or where sufficient evidence was established to prove their intent and therefore their sentences etc.

 

The announcement (and its content) by the PM was a good one but it's only one small part of a bigger global problem; every bit helps though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I forgot to mention that some suicide bombers are also considered (by the authorities) to be innocent victims in some countries. In cases like this you will find that the bad guys would force a person to become a suicide bomber by threatening to kill his entire family if he didn't commit the act. This is a particularly common modus operandi in Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia etc.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To add to what Bop has already pointed out there are proscribed acts under the criminal law such as promoting terrorism, preparation for acts of terrorism and assisting in the preparation of terrorist acts etc that she was speaking of when she talked about tougher penalties. I think her exact words were "terrorist-related" offences.

 

I don't think anyone is going to argue against that in the current climate. Joe public would probably like to see more people deprived of citizenship and deported. Given the number of people that are said to pose and active threat the number of people that have been the subject of such orders since she became HS in 2010 is 33 which seems remarkably low.

 

 

https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/stories/2016-06-21/citizenship-stripping-new-figures-reveal-theresa-may-has-deprived-33-individuals-of-british-citizenship

 

Veronica

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

My feling is that nobody really knows anything about God. .So I haven't bothered studying religion beyond what was forced into me at School.

So thanks for the replies, I feel I am beginning to learn something.

Its just a shame that anyone who suggests trying to understand these lunatics, or even point out the simple fact it wasn't just women and children they attacked, is likely to be labelled a sympathiser.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John52 - 2017-06-05 11:17 AM

 

 

My feling is that nobody really knows anything about God. .So I haven't bothered studying religion beyond what was forced into me at School.

So thanks for the replies, I feel I am beginning to learn something.

Its just a shame that anyone who suggests trying to understand these lunatics, or even point out the simple fact it wasn't just women and children they attacked, is likely to be labelled a sympathiser.

 

Gaining an understanding of these lunatics is not a simple matter. I found this wiki article which shows just how complicated it is.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_terrorism#Motivations_of_Islamic_terrorism

 

Though impossible to summarise I hazard a guess that our home grown terrorists are often likely to be as described thus in the article-

 

 

 

"Two studies of the background of Muslim terrorists in Europe—one of the UK and one of France—found little connection between religious piety and terrorism. According to a "restricted" report of hundreds of case studies by the UK domestic counter-intelligence agency MI5,

 

[f]ar from being religious zealots, a large number of those involved in terrorism do not practise their faith regularly. Many lack religious literacy and could actually be regarded as religious novices. Very few have been brought up in strongly religious households, and there is a higher than average proportion of converts. Some are involved in drug-taking, drinking alcohol and visiting prostitutes. MI5 says there is evidence that a well-established religious identity actually protects against violent radicalisation.[31]?

 

A 2015 "general portrait" by Olivier Roy (see above) of "the conditions and circumstances" under which people living in France become "Islamic radicals" (terrorists or would-be terrorists) found radicalisation was not an "uprising of a Muslim community that is victim to poverty and racism: only young people join, including converts".[32] Or as another observer described it:

 

the large majority of French jihadists are second-generation Muslims who, unlike their parents, speak French, grew up with little to no contact with mosques or Muslim organizations, and before their conversions drank, took drugs, and had girlfriends. They are estranged from their parents and don’t know where to fit in. Or they are recent converts, largely from rural areas and many from divorced families. Why is that, Roy asks? If Islam or social conditions are essentially to blame for breeding terrorism, why do such structural problems affect only this very narrowly defined group? Why does it not attract first- or third-generation French Muslims, or those whose Islamic culture is the deepest? And why does its appeal extend to children of the successful middle class? His answer: jihadism is a nihilistic generational revolt, not a religiously inspired utopianism."

 

Veronica

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Violet1956 - 2017-06-05 11:53 AM

 

John52 - 2017-06-05 11:17 AM

 

 

My feling is that nobody really knows anything about God. .So I haven't bothered studying religion beyond what was forced into me at School.

So thanks for the replies, I feel I am beginning to learn something.

Its just a shame that anyone who suggests trying to understand these lunatics, or even point out the simple fact it wasn't just women and children they attacked, is likely to be labelled a sympathiser.

 

Gaining an understanding of these lunatics is not a simple matter. I found this wiki article which shows just how complicated it is.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_terrorism#Motivations_of_Islamic_terrorism

 

Though impossible to summarise I hazard a guess that our home grown terrorists are often likely to be as described thus in the article-

 

 

 

"Two studies of the background of Muslim terrorists in Europe—one of the UK and one of France—found little connection between religious piety and terrorism. According to a "restricted" report of hundreds of case studies by the UK domestic counter-intelligence agency MI5,

 

[f]ar from being religious zealots, a large number of those involved in terrorism do not practise their faith regularly. Many lack religious literacy and could actually be regarded as religious novices. Very few have been brought up in strongly religious households, and there is a higher than average proportion of converts. Some are involved in drug-taking, drinking alcohol and visiting prostitutes. MI5 says there is evidence that a well-established religious identity actually protects against violent radicalisation.[31]?

 

A 2015 "general portrait" by Olivier Roy (see above) of "the conditions and circumstances" under which people living in France become "Islamic radicals" (terrorists or would-be terrorists) found radicalisation was not an "uprising of a Muslim community that is victim to poverty and racism: only young people join, including converts".[32] Or as another observer described it:

 

the large majority of French jihadists are second-generation Muslims who, unlike their parents, speak French, grew up with little to no contact with mosques or Muslim organizations, and before their conversions drank, took drugs, and had girlfriends. They are estranged from their parents and don’t know where to fit in. Or they are recent converts, largely from rural areas and many from divorced families. Why is that, Roy asks? If Islam or social conditions are essentially to blame for breeding terrorism, why do such structural problems affect only this very narrowly defined group? Why does it not attract first- or third-generation French Muslims, or those whose Islamic culture is the deepest? And why does its appeal extend to children of the successful middle class? His answer: jihadism is a nihilistic generational revolt, not a religiously inspired utopianism."

 

Veronica

Thanks Veronica

Bit complicated for the Daily Mail then. They'll just have to stick to calling them cowards and thinking they can frighten them off.

Pity it wasn't Corbyn in power instead of Blair when the Americans wanted to invade Iraq and Afghanistan. Maybe our bombing innocent civilians there makes them feel justified in doing the same thing here. :-(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest pelmetman
John52 - 2017-06-05 9:21 AM

 

I'm still none the wiser.

 

You and Corbyn never will be, if you think having a dialogue with a culture who's reason for being is to kill us Kafirs will make a blind bit of difference *-) .......

 

They've been at for 1400 years :-| ........

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest pelmetman
John52 - 2017-06-05 1:10 PM

 

Violet1956 - 2017-06-05 11:53 AM

 

John52 - 2017-06-05 11:17 AM

 

 

My feling is that nobody really knows anything about God. .So I haven't bothered studying religion beyond what was forced into me at School.

So thanks for the replies, I feel I am beginning to learn something.

Its just a shame that anyone who suggests trying to understand these lunatics, or even point out the simple fact it wasn't just women and children they attacked, is likely to be labelled a sympathiser.

 

Gaining an understanding of these lunatics is not a simple matter. I found this wiki article which shows just how complicated it is.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_terrorism#Motivations_of_Islamic_terrorism

 

Though impossible to summarise I hazard a guess that our home grown terrorists are often likely to be as described thus in the article-

 

 

 

"Two studies of the background of Muslim terrorists in Europe—one of the UK and one of France—found little connection between religious piety and terrorism. According to a "restricted" report of hundreds of case studies by the UK domestic counter-intelligence agency MI5,

 

[f]ar from being religious zealots, a large number of those involved in terrorism do not practise their faith regularly. Many lack religious literacy and could actually be regarded as religious novices. Very few have been brought up in strongly religious households, and there is a higher than average proportion of converts. Some are involved in drug-taking, drinking alcohol and visiting prostitutes. MI5 says there is evidence that a well-established religious identity actually protects against violent radicalisation.[31]?

 

A 2015 "general portrait" by Olivier Roy (see above) of "the conditions and circumstances" under which people living in France become "Islamic radicals" (terrorists or would-be terrorists) found radicalisation was not an "uprising of a Muslim community that is victim to poverty and racism: only young people join, including converts".[32] Or as another observer described it:

 

the large majority of French jihadists are second-generation Muslims who, unlike their parents, speak French, grew up with little to no contact with mosques or Muslim organizations, and before their conversions drank, took drugs, and had girlfriends. They are estranged from their parents and don’t know where to fit in. Or they are recent converts, largely from rural areas and many from divorced families. Why is that, Roy asks? If Islam or social conditions are essentially to blame for breeding terrorism, why do such structural problems affect only this very narrowly defined group? Why does it not attract first- or third-generation French Muslims, or those whose Islamic culture is the deepest? And why does its appeal extend to children of the successful middle class? His answer: jihadism is a nihilistic generational revolt, not a religiously inspired utopianism."

 

Veronica

Thanks Veronica

Bit complicated for the Daily Mail then. They'll just have to stick to calling them cowards and thinking they can frighten them off.

Pity it wasn't Corbyn in power instead of Blair when the Americans wanted to invade Iraq and Afghanistan. Maybe our bombing innocent civilians there makes them feel justified in doing the same thing here. :-(

 

So Isis evolved because of disaffected 2nd generation Muslims in France and the UK? *-) .........

 

Jeeezus..... the happy clappy people are really desperate to believe anything other than it being to do with Islam :-| .......

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

pelmetman - 2017-06-05 1:32 PM

 

John52 - 2017-06-05 1:10 PM

 

Violet1956 - 2017-06-05 11:53 AM

 

John52 - 2017-06-05 11:17 AM

 

 

My feling is that nobody really knows anything about God. .So I haven't bothered studying religion beyond what was forced into me at School.

So thanks for the replies, I feel I am beginning to learn something.

Its just a shame that anyone who suggests trying to understand these lunatics, or even point out the simple fact it wasn't just women and children they attacked, is likely to be labelled a sympathiser.

 

Gaining an understanding of these lunatics is not a simple matter. I found this wiki article which shows just how complicated it is.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_terrorism#Motivations_of_Islamic_terrorism

 

Though impossible to summarise I hazard a guess that our home grown terrorists are often likely to be as described thus in the article-

 

 

 

"Two studies of the background of Muslim terrorists in Europe—one of the UK and one of France—found little connection between religious piety and terrorism. According to a "restricted" report of hundreds of case studies by the UK domestic counter-intelligence agency MI5,

 

[f]ar from being religious zealots, a large number of those involved in terrorism do not practise their faith regularly. Many lack religious literacy and could actually be regarded as religious novices. Very few have been brought up in strongly religious households, and there is a higher than average proportion of converts. Some are involved in drug-taking, drinking alcohol and visiting prostitutes. MI5 says there is evidence that a well-established religious identity actually protects against violent radicalisation.[31]?

 

A 2015 "general portrait" by Olivier Roy (see above) of "the conditions and circumstances" under which people living in France become "Islamic radicals" (terrorists or would-be terrorists) found radicalisation was not an "uprising of a Muslim community that is victim to poverty and racism: only young people join, including converts".[32] Or as another observer described it:

 

the large majority of French jihadists are second-generation Muslims who, unlike their parents, speak French, grew up with little to no contact with mosques or Muslim organizations, and before their conversions drank, took drugs, and had girlfriends. They are estranged from their parents and don’t know where to fit in. Or they are recent converts, largely from rural areas and many from divorced families. Why is that, Roy asks? If Islam or social conditions are essentially to blame for breeding terrorism, why do such structural problems affect only this very narrowly defined group? Why does it not attract first- or third-generation French Muslims, or those whose Islamic culture is the deepest? And why does its appeal extend to children of the successful middle class? His answer: jihadism is a nihilistic generational revolt, not a religiously inspired utopianism."

 

Veronica

Thanks Veronica

Bit complicated for the Daily Mail then. They'll just have to stick to calling them cowards and thinking they can frighten them off.

Pity it wasn't Corbyn in power instead of Blair when the Americans wanted to invade Iraq and Afghanistan. Maybe our bombing innocent civilians there makes them feel justified in doing the same thing here. :-(

 

So Isis evolved because of disaffected 2nd generation Muslims in France and the UK? *-) .........

 

 

 

 

 

I didn't say that Dave. We were discussing the type of home grown terrorists that likes of ISIS manipulate to do their dirty work for them.

 

From the description given by the MI5 agent, likely to be a pretty good source in my view, they are not likely to be people motivated by any true belief in the need for retribution for our involvement in Iraq or other wars in the Middle East; they are losers in life with no true purpose but to act on an impulse to destroy which they tack on to a religion of which they have a most basic knowledge fed to them by the likes of ISIS.

 

I suggest you read the wiki article in its entirety as there are many other views expressed in it but for me what our MI5 agent had to say from his/her experience of home grown terrorists was likely to be the most informed.

 

Veronica

Link to comment
Share on other sites

pelmetman - 2017-06-05 1:32 PM

 

John52 - 2017-06-05 1:10 PM

 

Violet1956 - 2017-06-05 11:53 AM

 

John52 - 2017-06-05 11:17 AM

 

 

My feling is that nobody really knows anything about God. .So I haven't bothered studying religion beyond what was forced into me at School.

So thanks for the replies, I feel I am beginning to learn something.

Its just a shame that anyone who suggests trying to understand these lunatics, or even point out the simple fact it wasn't just women and children they attacked, is likely to be labelled a sympathiser.

 

Gaining an understanding of these lunatics is not a simple matter. I found this wiki article which shows just how complicated it is.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_terrorism#Motivations_of_Islamic_terrorism

 

Though impossible to summarise I hazard a guess that our home grown terrorists are often likely to be as described thus in the article-

 

 

 

"Two studies of the background of Muslim terrorists in Europe—one of the UK and one of France—found little connection between religious piety and terrorism. According to a "restricted" report of hundreds of case studies by the UK domestic counter-intelligence agency MI5,

 

[f]ar from being religious zealots, a large number of those involved in terrorism do not practise their faith regularly. Many lack religious literacy and could actually be regarded as religious novices. Very few have been brought up in strongly religious households, and there is a higher than average proportion of converts. Some are involved in drug-taking, drinking alcohol and visiting prostitutes. MI5 says there is evidence that a well-established religious identity actually protects against violent radicalisation.[31]?

 

A 2015 "general portrait" by Olivier Roy (see above) of "the conditions and circumstances" under which people living in France become "Islamic radicals" (terrorists or would-be terrorists) found radicalisation was not an "uprising of a Muslim community that is victim to poverty and racism: only young people join, including converts".[32] Or as another observer described it:

 

the large majority of French jihadists are second-generation Muslims who, unlike their parents, speak French, grew up with little to no contact with mosques or Muslim organizations, and before their conversions drank, took drugs, and had girlfriends. They are estranged from their parents and don’t know where to fit in. Or they are recent converts, largely from rural areas and many from divorced families. Why is that, Roy asks? If Islam or social conditions are essentially to blame for breeding terrorism, why do such structural problems affect only this very narrowly defined group? Why does it not attract first- or third-generation French Muslims, or those whose Islamic culture is the deepest? And why does its appeal extend to children of the successful middle class? His answer: jihadism is a nihilistic generational revolt, not a religiously inspired utopianism."

 

Veronica

Thanks Veronica

Bit complicated for the Daily Mail then. They'll just have to stick to calling them cowards and thinking they can frighten them off.

Pity it wasn't Corbyn in power instead of Blair when the Americans wanted to invade Iraq and Afghanistan. Maybe our bombing innocent civilians there makes them feel justified in doing the same thing here. :-(

 

So Isis evolved because of disaffected 2nd generation Muslims in France and the UK? *-) .........

 

Jeeezus..... the happy clappy people are really desperate to believe anything other than it being to do with Islam :-| .......

 

 

 

 

You might have thought shouting "This is for Allah" and "This is for my family , this is for Islam" while driving foot long knives into innocent folk would give em a clue as to whats behind it ... Whats so difficult to understand ... Passages from the Quran recited by ISIS on many occasions tell you we are the dirty kuffar and they are the superior ones here to kill or convert ... Don't over think it ... Problem is it will not end and I can see before too long revenge attacks on home soil will start and then the wet left really will have a problem ... 3 more arrested at the weekend in my town in a big anti-terror sting and remember we gave the world the lovely 7/7 bomber Jermaine Lindsay

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John52 - 2017-06-05 9:21 AM
PJay - 2017-06-05 9:18 AM
John52 - 2017-06-05 8:44 AM.. but how can you have tougher penalties for suicide bombers?I haven't a clue what makes them do t. *-)
ALLAH !!
I'm still none the wiser.But talk of 'Cowards' and 'Tougher Penalties' suggests to me the Prime Minister doesn't understand it either, and is just saying what she thinks we want to hear . :-(
John it really is quite a simple thing to understand but should one be so inclined there is a whole raft of information out there to be looked into.
Quite simply these acts committed in the name of Allah are down to those involved believing that there is but one God and will do (as they believe the Koran requires)whatever is necessary to either eradicate or convert non believers.  Unfortunately there are so many sects within Islam that the 'extremists' have no compunction in slaughtering 'infidels' as well Islamic adherents albeit those of a different sect.  Wahabi happens to be one of the more fundamentalist sects but there are those who would target them for not being true adherents.  So you can see there is little hope of the situation coming to an end. 

As has been said some who carry out the acts are under duress such as the threat of their families being tortured/killed if they don't co-operate.  Others are children (some sold by families, others orphaned/placed) who are 'educated' in mosques/madrassas into the ways of the 'true believer'.  

It is something that harks back centuries, has never changed in outlook although one can see it has adapted to modern times.......the means of delivering death etc have become more sophisticated.
It is unfortunate that the 'adapting' has been in terms of delivering death instead of 'adapting' to living more harmoniously and peacefully. 
As long as there are mad mullahs hell bent on delivering their 'interpretation' of the Koran, as long as there are those whose ideals accord with those mullahs and as long as there are illiterate peoples (adults and children) who know nothing other than what the madrassas/mosques pronounce as the 'truth' we will have to contend with extremist religious violence.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

antony1969 - 2017-06-05 2:22 PM

 

pelmetman - 2017-06-05 1:32 PM

 

John52 - 2017-06-05 1:10 PM

 

Violet1956 - 2017-06-05 11:53 AM

 

John52 - 2017-06-05 11:17 AM

 

 

My feling is that nobody really knows anything about God. .So I haven't bothered studying religion beyond what was forced into me at School.

So thanks for the replies, I feel I am beginning to learn something.

Its just a shame that anyone who suggests trying to understand these lunatics, or even point out the simple fact it wasn't just women and children they attacked, is likely to be labelled a sympathiser.

 

Gaining an understanding of these lunatics is not a simple matter. I found this wiki article which shows just how complicated it is.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_terrorism#Motivations_of_Islamic_terrorism

 

Though impossible to summarise I hazard a guess that our home grown terrorists are often likely to be as described thus in the article-

 

 

 

"Two studies of the background of Muslim terrorists in Europe—one of the UK and one of France—found little connection between religious piety and terrorism. According to a "restricted" report of hundreds of case studies by the UK domestic counter-intelligence agency MI5,

 

[f]ar from being religious zealots, a large number of those involved in terrorism do not practise their faith regularly. Many lack religious literacy and could actually be regarded as religious novices. Very few have been brought up in strongly religious households, and there is a higher than average proportion of converts. Some are involved in drug-taking, drinking alcohol and visiting prostitutes. MI5 says there is evidence that a well-established religious identity actually protects against violent radicalisation.[31]?

 

A 2015 "general portrait" by Olivier Roy (see above) of "the conditions and circumstances" under which people living in France become "Islamic radicals" (terrorists or would-be terrorists) found radicalisation was not an "uprising of a Muslim community that is victim to poverty and racism: only young people join, including converts".[32] Or as another observer described it:

 

the large majority of French jihadists are second-generation Muslims who, unlike their parents, speak French, grew up with little to no contact with mosques or Muslim organizations, and before their conversions drank, took drugs, and had girlfriends. They are estranged from their parents and don’t know where to fit in. Or they are recent converts, largely from rural areas and many from divorced families. Why is that, Roy asks? If Islam or social conditions are essentially to blame for breeding terrorism, why do such structural problems affect only this very narrowly defined group? Why does it not attract first- or third-generation French Muslims, or those whose Islamic culture is the deepest? And why does its appeal extend to children of the successful middle class? His answer: jihadism is a nihilistic generational revolt, not a religiously inspired utopianism."

 

Veronica

Thanks Veronica

Bit complicated for the Daily Mail then. They'll just have to stick to calling them cowards and thinking they can frighten them off.

Pity it wasn't Corbyn in power instead of Blair when the Americans wanted to invade Iraq and Afghanistan. Maybe our bombing innocent civilians there makes them feel justified in doing the same thing here. :-(

 

So Isis evolved because of disaffected 2nd generation Muslims in France and the UK? *-) .........

 

Jeeezus..... the happy clappy people are really desperate to believe anything other than it being to do with Islam :-| .......

 

 

 

 

You might have thought shouting "This is for Allah" and "This is for my family , this is for Islam" while driving foot long knives into innocent folk would give em a clue as to whats behind it ... Whats so difficult to understand ... Passages from the Quran recited by ISIS on many occasions tell you we are the dirty kuffar and they are the superior ones here to kill or convert ... Don't over think it ... Problem is it will not end and I can see before too long revenge attacks on home soil will start and then the wet left really will have a problem ... 3 more arrested at the weekend in my town in a big anti-terror sting and remember we gave the world the lovely 7/7 bomber Jermaine Lindsay

 

Germaine Lindsay's profile (see below) seems to show him to be the archetypal loser that the mad mullahs are so easily able to manipulate to perform their dirty work.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4762591.stm

 

Veronica

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Violet1956 - 2017-06-05 2:40 PM

 

antony1969 - 2017-06-05 2:22 PM

 

pelmetman - 2017-06-05 1:32 PM

 

John52 - 2017-06-05 1:10 PM

 

Violet1956 - 2017-06-05 11:53 AM

 

John52 - 2017-06-05 11:17 AM

 

 

My feling is that nobody really knows anything about God. .So I haven't bothered studying religion beyond what was forced into me at School.

So thanks for the replies, I feel I am beginning to learn something.

Its just a shame that anyone who suggests trying to understand these lunatics, or even point out the simple fact it wasn't just women and children they attacked, is likely to be labelled a sympathiser.

 

Gaining an understanding of these lunatics is not a simple matter. I found this wiki article which shows just how complicated it is.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_terrorism#Motivations_of_Islamic_terrorism

 

Though impossible to summarise I hazard a guess that our home grown terrorists are often likely to be as described thus in the article-

 

 

 

"Two studies of the background of Muslim terrorists in Europe—one of the UK and one of France—found little connection between religious piety and terrorism. According to a "restricted" report of hundreds of case studies by the UK domestic counter-intelligence agency MI5,

 

[f]ar from being religious zealots, a large number of those involved in terrorism do not practise their faith regularly. Many lack religious literacy and could actually be regarded as religious novices. Very few have been brought up in strongly religious households, and there is a higher than average proportion of converts. Some are involved in drug-taking, drinking alcohol and visiting prostitutes. MI5 says there is evidence that a well-established religious identity actually protects against violent radicalisation.[31]?

 

A 2015 "general portrait" by Olivier Roy (see above) of "the conditions and circumstances" under which people living in France become "Islamic radicals" (terrorists or would-be terrorists) found radicalisation was not an "uprising of a Muslim community that is victim to poverty and racism: only young people join, including converts".[32] Or as another observer described it:

 

the large majority of French jihadists are second-generation Muslims who, unlike their parents, speak French, grew up with little to no contact with mosques or Muslim organizations, and before their conversions drank, took drugs, and had girlfriends. They are estranged from their parents and don’t know where to fit in. Or they are recent converts, largely from rural areas and many from divorced families. Why is that, Roy asks? If Islam or social conditions are essentially to blame for breeding terrorism, why do such structural problems affect only this very narrowly defined group? Why does it not attract first- or third-generation French Muslims, or those whose Islamic culture is the deepest? And why does its appeal extend to children of the successful middle class? His answer: jihadism is a nihilistic generational revolt, not a religiously inspired utopianism."

 

Veronica

Thanks Veronica

Bit complicated for the Daily Mail then. They'll just have to stick to calling them cowards and thinking they can frighten them off.

Pity it wasn't Corbyn in power instead of Blair when the Americans wanted to invade Iraq and Afghanistan. Maybe our bombing innocent civilians there makes them feel justified in doing the same thing here. :-(

 

So Isis evolved because of disaffected 2nd generation Muslims in France and the UK? *-) .........

 

Jeeezus..... the happy clappy people are really desperate to believe anything other than it being to do with Islam :-| .......

 

 

 

 

You might have thought shouting "This is for Allah" and "This is for my family , this is for Islam" while driving foot long knives into innocent folk would give em a clue as to whats behind it ... Whats so difficult to understand ... Passages from the Quran recited by ISIS on many occasions tell you we are the dirty kuffar and they are the superior ones here to kill or convert ... Don't over think it ... Problem is it will not end and I can see before too long revenge attacks on home soil will start and then the wet left really will have a problem ... 3 more arrested at the weekend in my town in a big anti-terror sting and remember we gave the world the lovely 7/7 bomber Jermaine Lindsay

 

Germaine Lindsay's profile (see below) seems to show him to be the archetypal loser that the mad mullahs are so easily able to manipulate to perform their dirty work.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4762591.stm

 

Veronica

 

In his case as with many you don't go from small time crook to someone happy to blow themselves up with innocent men , women and children without some degree of knowing what your doing and happy to do it ... His wife certainly had a normal upbringing and she's turned out worse than him so "loser" background doesn't cut it for me as an excuse for them ... Its nothing more simpler than wanting to convert or kill those who don't believe

Link to comment
Share on other sites

antony1969 - 2017-06-05 3:19 PM

 

Violet1956 - 2017-06-05 2:40 PM

 

antony1969 - 2017-06-05 2:22 PM

 

pelmetman - 2017-06-05 1:32 PM

 

John52 - 2017-06-05 1:10 PM

 

Violet1956 - 2017-06-05 11:53 AM

 

John52 - 2017-06-05 11:17 AM

 

 

My feling is that nobody really knows anything about God. .So I haven't bothered studying religion beyond what was forced into me at School.

So thanks for the replies, I feel I am beginning to learn something.

Its just a shame that anyone who suggests trying to understand these lunatics, or even point out the simple fact it wasn't just women and children they attacked, is likely to be labelled a sympathiser.

 

Gaining an understanding of these lunatics is not a simple matter. I found this wiki article which shows just how complicated it is.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_terrorism#Motivations_of_Islamic_terrorism

 

Though impossible to summarise I hazard a guess that our home grown terrorists are often likely to be as described thus in the article-

 

 

 

"Two studies of the background of Muslim terrorists in Europe—one of the UK and one of France—found little connection between religious piety and terrorism. According to a "restricted" report of hundreds of case studies by the UK domestic counter-intelligence agency MI5,

 

[f]ar from being religious zealots, a large number of those involved in terrorism do not practise their faith regularly. Many lack religious literacy and could actually be regarded as religious novices. Very few have been brought up in strongly religious households, and there is a higher than average proportion of converts. Some are involved in drug-taking, drinking alcohol and visiting prostitutes. MI5 says there is evidence that a well-established religious identity actually protects against violent radicalisation.[31]?

 

A 2015 "general portrait" by Olivier Roy (see above) of "the conditions and circumstances" under which people living in France become "Islamic radicals" (terrorists or would-be terrorists) found radicalisation was not an "uprising of a Muslim community that is victim to poverty and racism: only young people join, including converts".[32] Or as another observer described it:

 

the large majority of French jihadists are second-generation Muslims who, unlike their parents, speak French, grew up with little to no contact with mosques or Muslim organizations, and before their conversions drank, took drugs, and had girlfriends. They are estranged from their parents and don’t know where to fit in. Or they are recent converts, largely from rural areas and many from divorced families. Why is that, Roy asks? If Islam or social conditions are essentially to blame for breeding terrorism, why do such structural problems affect only this very narrowly defined group? Why does it not attract first- or third-generation French Muslims, or those whose Islamic culture is the deepest? And why does its appeal extend to children of the successful middle class? His answer: jihadism is a nihilistic generational revolt, not a religiously inspired utopianism."

 

Veronica

Thanks Veronica

Bit complicated for the Daily Mail then. They'll just have to stick to calling them cowards and thinking they can frighten them off.

Pity it wasn't Corbyn in power instead of Blair when the Americans wanted to invade Iraq and Afghanistan. Maybe our bombing innocent civilians there makes them feel justified in doing the same thing here. :-(

 

So Isis evolved because of disaffected 2nd generation Muslims in France and the UK? *-) .........

 

Jeeezus..... the happy clappy people are really desperate to believe anything other than it being to do with Islam :-| .......

 

 

 

 

You might have thought shouting "This is for Allah" and "This is for my family , this is for Islam" while driving foot long knives into innocent folk would give em a clue as to whats behind it ... Whats so difficult to understand ... Passages from the Quran recited by ISIS on many occasions tell you we are the dirty kuffar and they are the superior ones here to kill or convert ... Don't over think it ... Problem is it will not end and I can see before too long revenge attacks on home soil will start and then the wet left really will have a problem ... 3 more arrested at the weekend in my town in a big anti-terror sting and remember we gave the world the lovely 7/7 bomber Jermaine Lindsay

 

Germaine Lindsay's profile (see below) seems to show him to be the archetypal loser that the mad mullahs are so easily able to manipulate to perform their dirty work.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4762591.stm

 

Veronica

 

In his case as with many you don't go from small time crook to someone happy to blow themselves up with innocent men , women and children without some degree of knowing what your doing and happy to do it ... His wife certainly had a normal upbringing and she's turned out worse than him so "loser" background doesn't cut it for me as an excuse for them ... Its nothing more simpler than wanting to convert or kill those who don't believe

 

I'm not offering excuses for his or his wife's behaviour Antony. "Loser" is just one description of the man but there are far better and much worse descriptions that I'm unable to type without risking a ban. And yes he subscribed to Islamist ideology he's but one example of the what often is the type of person that does. I think we can agree that they are not good people. I'm just not willing to afford them the religious get out of jail card they try to play.

 

Veronica

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John52 - 2017-06-05 8:44 AM.. but how can you have tougher penalties for suicide bombers?I haven't a clue what makes them do t. But it seems to me thats something we need to understand before we can deal with it.Not fashionable to talk about understanding terrorists though is it?You'll probably get labelled a Terrorist Sympathiser like Jeremy Corbyn *-)

 

Deny them their moments of fame by making it illegal to publish their names (anywhere, ever) and also deny access to their bodies, which will be disposed of without religious ceremony and in a way which will be unappealing to islamic ideals - mix their ashes with pigs food and feed it to pigs or something along those lines.  It will hopefully become clear to would-be terrorists that their actions cause a lot of nuisance or much worse to their families - being arrested and interogated, as in the two recent cases, disposession of the terrorists assets, even if it makes the family homeless, none of which can be reported on, so the families cannot cast themselves publicly as victims.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John52 - 2017-06-05 1:10 PM

 

Pity it wasn't Corbyn in power instead of Blair when the Americans wanted to invade Iraq and Afghanistan. Maybe our bombing innocent civilians there makes them feel justified in doing the same thing here. :-(

 

So you would have liked him to have had the IRA strutting around Downing St. and Westminster then. Maybe taking potshots at the local protestants and setting off a few more bomb's just to keep in practise so they could kill more innocent civilians over here. *-)

 

I bet you're happy to see that Jack Letts has escaped from Isis and is now safe (for the moment). He must have been one of the good Isis soldier because he didn't like what they were doing. I wonder if he refused any of their orders.

 

Corbyn shouldn't be anywhere near Westminster, infact, he should be in jail for treason.

 

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...