Another London Terror Attack - London Bridge & Borough Market.

[TheRealTMA]

Unfortunately for the idea that Islamic terrorism is caused by the west there are several inconvenient facts.
First many more Muslims are victims of Islamic terrorists.This is mainly due to sunni/shia conflicts whose history goes back to 632-well before there were any US Presidents.
The Origins Of The Shiite-Sunni Split : Parallels : NPR
Secondly there were many terrorist acts committed before even George W became president-The WTC bombing in 1993,bombing of the US Embassy Lebanon 1983 and again in 1984,the US embassies in Dar es Salaam and Nairobi 1998,Luxor massacre 1997,TWA 837 1985 and the seizure of the Grand mosque Mecca by Shiite militants killing 244 in 1979.

Not really. Unfortunately you forgot to include the elephant in the Middle East that's been supported by the West, particularly the US.

 

[theweaselsteve]

I'm not suggesting that The West has caused ALL of the issues facing Islam today. But I would certainly venture that the attacks on The West are fueled by their own actions. The WTC bombing in '93 was in retaliation of the US support for Israel in Palestine. The '83 bombing was in response to the US involvement in the Lebanese civil war. The 1998 bombings were in response to the extradition and alleged torture of 4 members of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad.

I'm not for a moment suggesting there isn't a problem within the Muslim community that needs desperately to be dealt with. If you look at any of the attacks on the West though, you will see they are in direct response to aggressive actions by the West itself. I'm not excusing it, I'm not justifying it, I'm stating facts.

It is blindingly obvious that bombing campaigns and oppression DO NOT WORK. They don't work when trying to solve the "Muslim Problem" globally, and they certainly don't work when it comes to trying to tackle home grown terrorism. Let's do the same thing over and over and expect a different outcome.

 

[Hvr]

Very little. They've done very well to erase the references online. I don't understand why.

Probably because it never happened.

 

[JohnK]

Probably because it never happened.

Oh dear Hvr. I know what I saw on the news.Telling me I was hallucinating is an insult.

I have played golf the past few days with a bloke who has been telling us a sad story where one of his employees lost a wife in the recent Manchester bombings. She was waiting to pick up her daughter after the concert had finished. Very very sad.

I hate cover ups. There is no justification for what's going on today.

 

[drron]

I'm not suggesting that The West has caused ALL of the issues facing Islam today. But I would certainly venture that the attacks on The West are fueled by their own actions. The WTC bombing in '93 was in retaliation of the US support for Israel in Palestine. The '83 bombing was in response to the US involvement in the Lebanese civil war. The 1998 bombings were in response to the extradition and alleged torture of 4 members of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad.

I'm not for a moment suggesting there isn't a problem within the Muslim community that needs desperately to be dealt with. If you look at any of the attacks on the West though, you will see they are in direct response to aggressive actions by the West itself. I'm not excusing it, I'm not justifying it, I'm stating facts.

It is blindingly obvious that bombing campaigns and oppression DO NOT WORK. They don't work when trying to solve the "Muslim Problem" globally, and they certainly don't work when it comes to trying to tackle home grown terrorism. Let's do the same thing over and over and expect a different outcome.

You do realise that those incidents you cite in the first paragraph occurred before any bombing campaigns by the US in the middle East so do not support your conclusion in the third paragraph.
also the reasons given by Al Qaeda for those incidents were basically excuses for their ultimate aim which was to restore a caliphate to the Middle east-Osama Bin Laden or for the whole world-ISIS.
A good summary of Al Qaeda and ISIS is here-
https://www.brookings.edu/testimonies/comparing-al-qaeda-and-isis-different-goals-different-targets/

And the Al Qaeda ideology here-
https://fas.org/sgp/crs/terror/RL32759.pdf.

 

[theweaselsteve]

My third paragraph states bombing campaigns AND oppression.

The point I'm trying to make which appears to be lost on you is that regardless of the religious ideology of those who perpetrate these acts, there is always a trigger, and this is usually in the form of a group of people feeling oppressed by a government. In order to prevent home grown terrorism (which I think is the subject of this discussion) we need to engage these individuals before they are radicalised. Oppressing them is not the answer.

What would you suggest is a good starting point to tackle this Drron?

 

[drron]

My third paragraph states bombing campaigns AND oppression.

The point I'm trying to make which appears to be lost on you is that regardless of the religious ideology of those who perpetrate these acts, there is always a trigger, and this is usually in the form of a group of people feeling oppressed by a government. In order to prevent home grown terrorism (which I think is the subject of this discussion) we need to engage these individuals before they are radicalised. Oppressing them is not the answer.

What would you suggest is a good starting point to tackle this Drron?

If you said bombing OR oppression I might have agreed with you.
But why has the problem of Islamic terrorism spread throughout the world and causing so much death and destruction than all other religions combined.It is not just home grown terrorism.As well the majority of terrorist events from the Lindt café on in Australia have not been due to those born in Australia.To just say we need to prevent radicalisation in Western Nations is not going to really help.Again the sunni/shia problems began in 632.

 

[Danger]

I think this thread has run its course.

 

[TheRealTMA]

Oh dear Hvr. I know what I saw on the news.Telling me I was hallucinating is an insult.

I have played golf the past few days with a bloke who has been telling us a sad story where one of his employees lost a wife in the recent Manchester bombings. She was waiting to pick up her daughter after the concert had finished. Very very sad.

I hate cover ups. There is no justification for what's going on today.

JohnK Your opinion is your opinion but for this thread, unsubstantiated claims of 'celebrations' after 9/11 are very inflammatory do not add to the debate (no matter how low it gets in this tread) and simply should not be accepted without proof.

 

[lovetravellingoz]

JohnK Your opinion is your opinion but for this thread, unsubstantiated claims of 'celebrations' after 9/11 are very inflammatory do not add to the debate (no matter how low it gets in this tread) and simply should not be accepted without proof.

And not to mention that "news grabs" are highly unreliable and often skewed to whim of the news director on the day. Plus it is easy to film a minority somewhere and then pass it off as a majority. TV news is hardly the resource to hang ones at on.

Terrorism is not new. Only the movement that pops up is new.



Personally I see the current ice scurge that has taken over Australia as a much bigger problem for Australians. It is killing and harming more Australians both indirectly and directly than terrorism is. Plus to fuel all these growing ice habits it a key reason for much of the growing crime. I am much more likely by far to be killed or injured by an ice addict than I am by a terrorist.

 

[theweaselsteve]

Oh dear Hvr. I know what I saw on the news.Telling me I was hallucinating is an insult.

No one is saying you were hallucinating. You may well have seen something on the news. Just because it was on the news doesn't mean it was true. The fact that there is now no mention of this at all (granted, I only did a cursory check) seems to back this up.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

No one is saying you were hallucinating. You may well have seen something on the news. Just because it was on the news doesn't mean it was true. The fact that there is now no mention of this at all (granted, I only did a cursory check) seems to back this up.

I can't confirm it was after September 11 specifically, but I too recalling seeing pictures on the news of 'celebrations' following a major terrorist incident.

 

[BacchusMarsh]

I can't confirm it was after September 11 specifically, but I too recalling seeing pictures on the news of 'celebrations' following a major terrorist incident.

And the relevance to the London attack is what, exactly? Any such idiots can hardly be considered representative of "Islam" as a whole, which is the intended weasel-minded implication of repeatedly mentioning such celebrations any time something happens.

Just as I don't lump myself with the clowns who were celebrating in Times Square after bin Laden was killed.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

And the relevance to the London attack is what, exactly? Any such idiots can hardly be considered representative of "Islam" as a whole, which is the intended weasel-minded implication of repeatedly mentioning such celebrations any time something happens.

Just as I don't lump myself with the clowns who were celebrating in Times Square after bin Laden was killed.

It doesn't - I was only confirming that I *thought* I saw something similar mentioned by JohnK.

 

[JohnK]

It doesn't - I was only confirming that I *thought* I saw something similar mentioned by JohnK.

I know what I saw. I'll keep mentioning it. I'll never forget.

 

[TheRealTMA]

I know what I saw. I'll keep mentioning it. I'll never forget.

But what's the point? Essentially you are just pushing an ethnic bashing point with no evidence. Even if a few reprobates in the western suburbs of Sydney were filmed by channel 9 or someone similar, it's completely irrelevant and not helpful in a discussion of the London outrage.

 

[JessicaTam]

I can't confirm it was after September 11 specifically, but I too recalling seeing pictures on the news of 'celebrations' following a major terrorist incident.

I recall discussion about similar 'celebrations' on Media Watch. A complete furphy as a lazy journo had just copied footage from completely unrelated events.

So the reason there is no mention on the 'net, is because it actually never happened.

But the original footage keeps getting mentioned, despite it having been completely disproved.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

I recall discussion about similar 'celebrations' on Media Watch. A complete furphy as a journo had just copied footage from completely unrelated events.

So the reason there is no mention on the 'net, is because it actually never happened.

But the original footage keeps getting mentioned, despite it having been completely disproved.

Thanks. That rings a bell too now that you mention it!

 

[lovetravellingoz]

I recall discussion about similar 'celebrations' on Media Watch. A complete furphy as a lazy journo had just copied footage from completely unrelated events.

So the reason there is no mention on the 'net, is because it actually never happened.

But the original footage keeps getting mentioned, despite it having been completely disproved.

One of my physics teachers advised me at secondary school that a fact is not a fact unless you can verify it.

As to TV news, those relying on it for their "facts" need to be wary: Media Watch: Just doing my job, mate (12/04/2010)

 

[gaz0303]

As to TV news, those relying on it for their "facts" need to be wary: Media Watch: Just doing my job, mate (12/04/2010)

I enjoyed reading Lionel Shriver's novel 'A New Republic'. Can understand why some journalists give it a bad review, but I enjoyed the read. Recommended.