RELIGIOUS Debate on Terroristm-who, why, etc.

[Spock]

So violent crime has increased but people don't know about it? Sorry that's way too sophisticated thinking for me.
Friends on the M.P. tell me different.

[Insidious Rex]

Well thats what happens when you post a blog. You get bad facts. The truth is that many many people attempted to stop the men who were running away once they realized what the heck was going on. There are eye witness accounts of men in suits trying to chase them down. Even one witness who said he saw an old man attempt to "rugby tackle" one of the suspects. So this idea that they just ran like frightened mice and refused to do anything while the bombers leisurely strolled away is just internet mythology being created as we speak.

[Falagar]

Originally Posted by Spock

So violent crime has increased but people don't know about it? Sorry that's way too sophisticated thinking for me.
Friends on the M.P. tell me different.

Or crime has decreased but become more violent.

[inked]

Shades of "Clockwork Orange" - the accents have changed to protect the storyline....! By the by, IR, the news report was BBC and the comments were blog exemplars. I trust you can distinguish the two as most folks can. It is true that the story may change. Check the BBC for that. Keep us updated.

As for the creation of internet mythology, I am not so sure. This many eyewitnesses do not make the Matthew-Sheppard-story-like-manipulation quite so simple, IMHO. But I'm sure that the allegations of certain policies is the creation of "anti-cultural bias" mythologies deliberately sought by certain cultural groups. 'Course, I do believe that the english meaning of "Stop, Police" is the same across the pond. Perhaps the chap should've, y'know?

[sun-star]

Chris, aside from the usual suspects expressing their collective fears while ignoring all the evidence that this was very, very far from a "random" occurrence, there is something else about this incident that troubles me. I read somewhere that this person may have been one of the bombers that escaped yesterday. Excuse me? Escaped? I've since read that when the detonators went off yesterday, the people in the tube and on the bus turned and ran away. My goodness, has nanny-statism driven people to think that only the government can take action to protect them? The Americans on Flight 93 certainly didn't cower or run away. Granted, there's not exactly anyplace to run on a plane, but they acted decisively to protect others knowing that they were probably going to die. I would think that if someone had a rucksack that just had a little boom, if I was still able I'd be moving towards that person immediately to separate him from the rucksack as quickly as possible before he could rectify his problem. Then I'd try to separate him from the land of the living post haste. Perhaps this is unfair to the people in Great Britain. Alas, I fear we'll have an opportunity soon enough to see how American's act in a similar circumstance.

I'm not sure why I'm responding to this since I'm not sure why it was posted; these opinions are obviously ill-informed. It may make Americans feel better to believe their public are uniquely courageous, but IR's right. Many eye-witnesses described how passengers chased and tried to catch the suspected bombers - despite not knowing whether bombs were about to go off around them. There was amazingly little panic.

I guess these bloggers are what you might call armchair anti-terrorists - they talk big on the other side of the pond, but stick them in a crowded tube train, where everyone's known for a fortnight that they could be seconds from death, and see how brave they look then.

[The Gaffer]

Originally Posted by Spock

So violent crime has increased but people don't know about it? Sorry that's way too sophisticated thinking for me.
Friends on the M.P. tell me different.

There is less violent crime but more of it gets reported to the police. The other thing to say is that burglaries are down both in terms of reported crimes and in the British Crime Survey estimates. So that post is clearly bollocks.

(The British Crime Survey is a more reliable indicator of crime levels because it can address unreported crimes. http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/bcs1.html)

Further, Phillip is clearly an idiot. Imagine if I had posted after 9/11 how Americans were all cowards because they let their flights 11/175/77 get hijacked? I would gladly separate him from his teeth.

However, the most worrying thing here is the rampant Islamophobia in that post. It is the intention of these bombers to divide our countries along religious lines and you are playing their game.

If you were actually reading what Muslims are saying instead of trolling then you would know that Muslim leaders are calling for more action within their community to root out these individuals.

Religion has long found a role as a willing apologist for violence. Christianity is no exception. Indeed, it probably has the highest body count.

[Spock]

to repeat:
Osama Bin Laden calling for a polarised world -- Muslims versus the West -- was telecast on Al-Jazeera on Saturday November 3, 2001.

That's a pretty straight forward aim and one to take up arms against....or learn Arabic.

[brownjenkins]

there are extremist groups from just about every religion on the planet that say things just as inflammatory... by implying that osama represents all muslims, or even a vast majority, you give him a level of credibility he does not deserve

the muslim religion is his tool, not his belief

[The Gaffer]

Originally Posted by Spock

to repeat:
Osama Bin Laden calling for a polarised world -- Muslims versus the West -- was telecast on Al-Jazeera on Saturday November 3, 2001.

That's a pretty straight forward aim and one to take up arms against....or learn Arabic.

To repeat: by doing so you are helping to make his ridiculous claims a reality.

[Spock]

...no, I am pointing out that he as a "leader" of insurrection, rebellion and terror, has called for this to happen and all those under him, quasi-under him or wannabe's are doing what he wants.
I'm not doing anything except to remind some here that is wasn't US that called for this.

[Rían]

Originally Posted by The Gaffer

I've never read the Koran nor have I any intention to. I prefer to listen to the majority Islamic view, which is that people who perpetrate these acts are not true Muslims.

IMO, the "majority Islamic view" that you refer to is the Westernized Islamic view, and is by no means a majority.

[brownjenkins]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

IMO, the "majority Islamic view" that you refer to is the Westernized Islamic view, and is by no means a majority.

i prefer to think of people as individuals... and i don't think i'd be going out on a limb saying that most individuals of the muslim faith do not condone the slaughter of innocents for any reason

[Rían]

Originally Posted by The Gaffer

Christianity has its fundamentalists too. There are people here who think the Bible is literally true, homosexuality is a sin, evolution should not be taught in schools and God made the world in 6 days around 6,000 BC or something.

So what? Can you prove they're wrong?

There are people who think that London is in England. There are people who think that the Big Bang occurred. There are people who think Elvis is alive. There are people who think aliens exist. There are people who think William Wallace existed. There are people who think King Arthur was an actual person. All of these things are claims to truth and can be evaluated to varying degrees, depending upon various things such as how long ago they were purported to take place. Some of these things are more important to evaluate and consider than others.

All religions have them. What we have to do is make sure that they have as little power and influence as possible.

Let's compare this to a statement you made shortly after ...

I think it's profoundly arrogant to see our own culture as inherently superior.

Care to retract anything? I think I've only used the rolley-eyed smilie about 4 times, but IMHO, your statement about having "as little power and influence as possible", especially after the following quote on arrogance, deserves a --> AND a

(and I think evolution should be taught in schools. It's certainly a possibility, altho rather a remote one, IMHO, and mainly held because of strong personal biases against the other option.)

[Rían]

Originally Posted by brownjenkins

i prefer to think of people as individuals... and i don't think i'd be going out on a limb saying that most individuals of the muslim faith do not condone the slaughter of innocents for any reason

I like to think of people as individuals, too. I was responding to a claim by Gaffer, tho, about what viewpoint consistitutes a majority viewpoint in his opinion.

As far as your statement, I agree that "most individuals of the muslim faith do not condone the slaughter of innocents for any reason" - the tricky part is their definition of "innocents" ...

[brownjenkins]

As far as your statement, I agree that "most individuals of the muslim faith do not condone the slaughter of innocents for any reason" - the tricky part is their definition of "innocents" ...

most people of the muslim faith would not condone events like 9/11, for instance... some probably do... even more probably don't approve of the terrorist methods, but sympathize at least to some extent with the stated motivations behind the acts... and i'm sure many just aren't sure one way or the other... and i'll bet you can find christians, hindus and agnostics in the world who fall into all these categories

i heard an interview with one british muslim woman who sincerely believed 9/11 was one big ploy by western civilization to frame muslims... is she evil or does she just misunderstand the situation? and, if not evil, what has lead her to this misunderstanding? can it be placed solely upon radical muslim fanatics, or can part of the misunderstanding be a result of actual issues she has to deal with as a muslim in a western nation?

the point? when you stop talking about individuals and start to categorize by things like race, religious beliefs and national identities, you lose sight of the individual and they become an "american", "catholic", "arab" or "muslim"... and, in time, any individual that falls into one of those categories, created and then defined based on a small minority, has their behavior automatically sterotyped

as i said earlier in this thread (or one it was split from)... the fact alone that there are thousands of devout muslims living perfectly normal, peaceable and happy lives is enough to show that a particular religious belief, in and of itself, has absolutely nothing to do with terrorism

[Rían]

But sometimes categorization is a necessary evil ... I'm sure there were many nice men in Hitler's army, and some that didn't agree with his policies, but realistically, you can't call a cease fire and go interview people, and then go back and only shoot at the ones that think Hitler was right

[inked]

Originally Posted by sun-star

I'm not sure why I'm responding to this since I'm not sure why it was posted; these opinions are obviously ill-informed. It may make Americans feel better to believe their public are uniquely courageous, but IR's right. Many eye-witnesses described how passengers chased and tried to catch the suspected bombers - despite not knowing whether bombs were about to go off around them. There was amazingly little panic.

I guess these bloggers are what you might call armchair anti-terrorists - they talk big on the other side of the pond, but stick them in a crowded tube train, where everyone's known for a fortnight that they could be seconds from death, and see how brave they look then.

Sun-star,

I posted the news article and blog responses so you coud see what we were being told and the variety of responses to it. Apparently this was not patently obvious. *shrugs* I thought some of the responses were a bit off and over the top. But when the news reports are stated to be thus-and-so, without recording the valorous acts, you can see why people not well read nor knowing any Brits (personally or on-line) might get a false impression.

My sole purpose was illustrate what we were hearing and the responses.

I am very gratified to hear that the valorous acts were there. I knew it in my bones, but then I've read CSL and JRRT and JKR. Many haven't!

[brownjenkins]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

But sometimes categorization is a necessary evil ... I'm sure there were many nice men in Hitler's army, and some that didn't agree with his policies, but realistically, you can't call a cease fire and go interview people, and then go back and only shoot at the ones that think Hitler was right

war was a necessity in that case, but not necessarily the categorization... there was a lot in the media during ww2 demonizing the germans and japanese as a race of people (both being defined as inherently violent by their very nature and culture, something we were luckily wrong about)... using hate and fear as a motivation for war, as opposed to logic and reason... stereotypes were formed that some who lived through that era never quite gave up... look back at the media of the time... some of it is quite ugly (on both sides, of course)

it's human nature to react that way... we're a tribal animal who trusts and relates best to others who share the most in common with ourselves, be it beliefs or geographic proximity... but i think it's important to fight those tendencies on a regular basis

[sun-star]

Originally Posted by inked

I posted the news article and blog responses so you coud see what we were being told and the variety of responses to it. Apparently this was not patently obvious. *shrugs* I thought some of the responses were a bit off and over the top. But when the news reports are stated to be thus-and-so, without recording the valorous acts, you can see why people not well read nor knowing any Brits (personally or on-line) might get a false impression.

My sole purpose was illustrate what we were hearing and the responses.

You didn't comment on any of the remarks you posted, nor did you give them any context (the link you provided doesn't work). If you didn't agree with them you should have said so, and if you knew they were inaccurate, IMO you shouldn't have perpetuated their errors by posting them here. This is indeed how internet myth is born.

If you want to post the American news reports from which you or these posters, whoever they are, obtained their false information, that would be interesting. The BBC and all British reports give a completely different story.

[Lief Erikson]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

IMO, the "majority Islamic view" that you refer to is the Westernized Islamic view, and is by no means a majority.

What evidence leads you to that opinion, RÃ*an?