Explosion at MEN Arena/Victoria Station

[Damocles]

I think the outfit illustrates precisely my point; it's a while back that we were doing this sort of stuff. The guy who quoted me is surely not suggesting ISIS are seeking revenge for acts committed nearly 1,000 years ago?

Sorry, I'm a fan of a strategy game called "Crusader Kings 2" and one of the memes coming out of that is a Deus Vult meme that I enjoy posting and always brightens my day. I meant no serious point by it.

But in terms of ISIS, yeah he's pretty close. Really whacking the ISIS belief system on the head is difficult because ISIS doesn't really exist as we think of it. There's hundreds of small terror groups across different regions and different countries that have flocked under the ISIS flag. It's better described as an idea like Communism - although there's a ground zero and a small force behind it, the idea that everybody who flew the hammer and sickle was all affiliated, shared the exact same beliefs or had a decent Command and Control structure is somewhat far fetched. With ISIS it's absolutely ludicrous.

However, what can be said is that they're an offshoot of Salafist Jihadism which is an offshoot Salafism which is a sort of offshoot of Wahhabism which is an offshoot of Conservative Sunni which is an offshoot of Sunni which is a sect of Islam.

They belief that Islam was in its most perfect form when it was first conceived and that everything that has happened to reform it since then has been done due to corruption by the infidels. So yes, the Crusades does play a big part in that as do many other events. This is also why they smash up historical sites - they think that they stand as monuments to the corruption of the purest form.

Their goal is to create a war between themselves and a coalition of more than 80 countries. That number is important, 79 is not enough. They then will take over, in order, Dabiq (a northern Syrian town), Damascus, then Jerusalem then Rome. This will then lead the countries to fight against them in a battle that they will lose but during the loss they will set off a chain of events that will bring about the end of the world.

This is why they suicide bomb. Their goal is to create anger towards Muslims who they hope will then join them, and to encourage the countries to start bombing them to get that coalition moving.

This is also why I'm pretty irritated by people playing directly into their hands on this thread and elsewhere.

 

[mekonmcfc]

Young innocent girls appeal to their warped view of the world, they were trying to prove a point

yes didnt think of that, which is obvious with everything going on at the moment

 

[blueinsa]

I think we really do need to move away from the idea that you're a massive lefty or part of the PC brigade if you don't subscribe to the idea that anyone being under suspicion of being an ISIS sympathiser should be locked up indefinitely. It's more a case of wanting a course of action that actually works. I really couldn't care less what happens to any individual that supports the mass slaughter of innocent people and I really wouldn't lose sleep over the idea of somebody that supports ISIS or their viewpoint being locked up in a prison for the rest of their lives. The problem I have is that I don't think it would work and it would actually lead to further radicalisation of more people, something I think we all agree should be avoided. I think that in the vast majority of cases it would be nigh on impossible to identify who an actual supporter of ISIS is and innocent people would end up in prison. Now some people think a few innocents being locked up is an acceptable level of collateral damage if it prevents further atrocities (I agree, it probably would be the lesser of two evils). The problem is if you think locking up innocent people plays into the hands of terrorists and would lead to further radicalisation, then it doesn't make you a bleeding heart liberal to be against what he's suggesting, it's just common sense.

Well said and thanks for that.

 

[RandomJ]

I think we really do need to move away from the idea that you're a massive lefty or part of the PC brigade if you don't subscribe to the idea that anyone being under suspicion of being an ISIS sympathiser should be locked up indefinitely. It's more a case of wanting a course of action that actually works. I really couldn't care less what happens to any individual that supports the mass slaughter of innocent people and I really wouldn't lose sleep over the idea of somebody that supports ISIS or their viewpoint being locked up in a prison for the rest of their lives. The problem I have is that I don't think it would work and it would actually lead to further radicalisation of more people, something I think we all agree should be avoided. I think that in the vast majority of cases it would be nigh on impossible to identify who an actual supporter of ISIS is and innocent people would end up in prison. Now some people think a few innocents being locked up is an acceptable level of collateral damage if it prevents further atrocities (I agree, it probably would be the lesser of two evils). The problem is if you think locking up innocent people plays into the hands of terrorists and would lead to further radicalisation, then it doesn't make you a bleeding heart liberal to be against what he's suggesting, it's just common sense.

People want a simple solution to one of the most complex problems in the world today. I personally don't think there ever will be a solution to this and shit like this will carry on for decades.

 

[Chippy_boy]

I think we really do need to move away from the idea that you're a massive lefty or part of the PC brigade if you don't subscribe to the idea that anyone being under suspicion of being an ISIS sympathiser should be locked up indefinitely. It's more a case of wanting a course of action that actually works. I really couldn't care less what happens to any individual that supports the mass slaughter of innocent people and I really wouldn't lose sleep over the idea of somebody that supports ISIS or their viewpoint being locked up in a prison for the rest of their lives. The problem I have is that I don't think it would work and it would actually lead to further radicalisation of more people, something I think we all agree should be avoided. I think that in the vast majority of cases it would be nigh on impossible to identify who an actual supporter of ISIS is and innocent people would end up in prison. Now some people think a few innocents being locked up is an acceptable level of collateral damage if it prevents further atrocities (I agree, it probably would be the lesser of two evils). The problem is if you think locking up innocent people plays into the hands of terrorists and would lead to further radicalisation, then it doesn't make you a bleeding heart liberal to be against what he's suggesting, it's just common sense.

Is there scope from tightening of the laws though? In the 1990's it was illegal to make child porn, but not to own it or to look at it. But we changed that, so that not only is it illegal to even look at it, it's also (rightly!) completely socially unacceptable to do so. We've changed the rules and everyone knows the rules. There's no excuses and people caught are rightly punished.

I am no expert on this, so I don't know what laws already exist, but I raise the question if the laws covering extremism and terrorism can be tightened similarly. It seems often the terrorists are known to the security services. How are they known to them? Maybe some of the acts that caused the police to know of them, could in themselves be made illegal? So viewing online material promoting terrorist activity for example? We are able to lock people up for just looking at indecent images of children, so surely it's not a step too far to also lock up people reading about how to make bombs?

I suppose we might debate whether more draconian measures would help overall. I don't know, but from what I can gather, we might have been able to lock up the bloke who committed this terrible crime; and indeed the guy on London Bridge too. For me, that would be a good start.

 

[Blue Llama]

Haha, carry on happy clapping, have you got a photo of the Eiffel Tower lit up like the union flag on your phone that you show everyone around the water cooler? that will frighten the life out of the jihadis

Your losing it mate.

 

[tolmie's hairdoo]

This was a horrible act of violence, which I'm sure no single religion would advocate.

I personally have been impacted by this as my wife and 12 year old daughter were there, they were in the line to walk out the exit near to the where the bomb went off and that would have been their route out. We are extremely thankful that they got home safely but the impact this has had on our family is there. My daughter has barely spoken or eaten for 2 days, my wife is in constant tears. This will take time for us to heal from this and we have to keep reminding ourselves how lucky we have been. The images and sounds which have been imprinted on both will remain with them for a long time.

We are truly heartbroken by the experience but totally fail to comprehend what the people who have lost loved ones are currently feeling.

The question is always Why? these fuckers have death too easy. Don't even think these are religious fanatics. I have Muslim friends and they all condemn the behaviour of these.

I just hope the Governments of the world could do something different, but nobody knows what.

All I can say is - I love my family to bits but I also take them for granted. These last few days has reinforced my feelings and the extra hug or kiss doesn't hurt nobody.

I'm glad they are safe, mate.

There is someone at my little girl's school, 11, I think, she has a broken leg.

Not sure if in the rush to get out or the actual explosion.

Best wishes.

 

[Gelsons Dad]

You are of course aware of how ridiculous this post is given that Jerusalem was taken by force in the Muslim conquests some 400 years earlier!

Now if only i could find a suitable picture.

 

[KenTheLandlord]

I think the outfit illustrates precisely my point; it's a while back that we were doing this sort of stuff. The guy who quoted me is surely not suggesting ISIS are seeking revenge for acts committed nearly 1,000 years ago?

He maybe suggesting revenge for acts committed 4 months ago.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...mbers-strike-islamic-state-fighters-in-libya/

 

[KenTheLandlord]

I think we really do need to move away from the idea that you're a massive lefty or part of the PC brigade if you don't subscribe to the idea that anyone being under suspicion of being an ISIS sympathiser should be locked up indefinitely. It's more a case of wanting a course of action that actually works. I really couldn't care less what happens to any individual that supports the mass slaughter of innocent people and I really wouldn't lose sleep over the idea of somebody that supports ISIS or their viewpoint being locked up in a prison for the rest of their lives. The problem I have is that I don't think it would work and it would actually lead to further radicalisation of more people, something I think we all agree should be avoided. I think that in the vast majority of cases it would be nigh on impossible to identify who an actual supporter of ISIS is and innocent people would end up in prison. Now some people think a few innocents being locked up is an acceptable level of collateral damage if it prevents further atrocities (I agree, it probably would be the lesser of two evils). The problem is if you think locking up innocent people plays into the hands of terrorists and would lead to further radicalisation, then it doesn't make you a bleeding heart liberal to be against what he's suggesting, it's just common sense.

very good post