-
Seems to be this is a kind massive "scared of offending" pattern. Us "westerners" are afraid of being labelled racists and "normal" Muslims are afraid of slandering the religion that is such an important part of their lives. The result is industrial grade deflection and denial, e.g. lone wolf, nothing to do with Islam, Iraq, Afghanistan etc. etc. I mean publishing cartoons shouldn't even be an issue in our societies, but it is.
I won't even pretend to know what the silver bullet is, but I do know that pretending there isn't a problem with the religion fostering this shit isn't helping. Nor does it help to make the absurd claim that other religions are just as bad.
-
@Rancid-Schnitzel I fully agree with your first part, denial is rife and the first step has to be a willingness to confront the issue and we see precious little will in this regard.
I have a degree of sympathy for your second part but it does not sit well with me that the alternative to not confronting the issue is to blanket blame an entire religion or section of society (I'm not totally sure that is what you're saying, but I'm not sure it isn't either). You're right in saying that other religions are just as bad is of no help but (on here at least) I don't think that is what many people have said. What has been said is that there are some odious comparisons from the OT and the Q'uran but that most Christians do not take this literally and nor do most Muslims. Also that Christianity as a whole has moved away from literal interpretation and in most instances so has Islam.
The very real problem is the significant minority of Muslims that do profess to adhere to the literal interpretation and then spread this insanity. A willingness to openly confront this problem, from both Muslims and non-Muslims has to be the way to at least start to solve the problem.
-
@Catogrande said in Another attack in London:
@Rancid-Schnitzel I fully agree with your first part, denial is rife and the first step has to be a willingness to confront the issue and we see precious little will in this regard.
I have a degree of sympathy for your second part but it does not sit well with me that the alternative to not confronting the issue is to blanket blame an entire religion or section of society (I'm not totally sure that is what you're saying, but I'm not sure it isn't either). You're right in saying that other religions are just as bad is of no help but (on here at least) I don't think that is what many people have said. What has been said is that there are some odious comparisons from the OT and the Q'uran but that most Christians do not take this literally and nor do most Muslims. Also that Christianity as a whole has moved away from literal interpretation and in most instances so has Islam.
The very real problem is the significant minority of Muslims that do profess to adhere to the literal interpretation and then spread this insanity. A willingness to openly confront this problem, from both Muslims and non-Muslims has to be the way to at least start to solve the problem.
That's the longer, more refined version of what I was trying to say Cato
However, I disagree that comparisons with other religions are not common.
-
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in Another attack in London:
@Catogrande said in Another attack in London:
@Rancid-Schnitzel I fully agree with your first part, denial is rife and the first step has to be a willingness to confront the issue and we see precious little will in this regard.
I have a degree of sympathy for your second part but it does not sit well with me that the alternative to not confronting the issue is to blanket blame an entire religion or section of society (I'm not totally sure that is what you're saying, but I'm not sure it isn't either). You're right in saying that other religions are just as bad is of no help but (on here at least) I don't think that is what many people have said. What has been said is that there are some odious comparisons from the OT and the Q'uran but that most Christians do not take this literally and nor do most Muslims. Also that Christianity as a whole has moved away from literal interpretation and in most instances so has Islam.
The very real problem is the significant minority of Muslims that do profess to adhere to the literal interpretation and then spread this insanity. A willingness to openly confront this problem, from both Muslims and non-Muslims has to be the way to at least start to solve the problem.
That's the longer, more refined version of what I was trying to say Cato
However, I disagree that comparisons with other religions are not common.
That's often the problem with the lack of context and emphasis in the (hastily) written word. We can all see different things within it.
-
@Catogrande said in Another attack in London:
@Rancid-Schnitzel I fully agree with your first part, denial is rife and the first step has to be a willingness to confront the issue and we see precious little will in this regard.
I have a degree of sympathy for your second part but it does not sit well with me that the alternative to not confronting the issue is to blanket blame an entire religion or section of society (I'm not totally sure that is what you're saying, but I'm not sure it isn't either). You're right in saying that other religions are just as bad is of no help but (on here at least) I don't think that is what many people have said. What has been said is that there are some odious comparisons from the OT and the Q'uran but that most Christians do not take this literally and nor do most Muslims. Also that Christianity as a whole has moved away from literal interpretation and in most instances so has Islam.
The very real problem is the significant minority of Muslims that do profess to adhere to the literal interpretation and then spread this insanity. A willingness to openly confront this problem, from both Muslims and non-Muslims has to be the way to at least start to solve the problem.
Increasingly people are realising there is not an easy answer or silver bullet. The least shite solution is the best solution. And to me a shite, but least shite solution is actually dealing with an entire religion as you cannot deal with only part of it.
-
Thankfully the Cantabrian is going to pull through
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/93335859/kiwi-stabbed-in-london-terror-attacks -
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in Another attack in London:
@Catogrande said in Another attack in London:
@Rancid-Schnitzel I fully agree with your first part, denial is rife and the first step has to be a willingness to confront the issue and we see precious little will in this regard.
I have a degree of sympathy for your second part but it does not sit well with me that the alternative to not confronting the issue is to blanket blame an entire religion or section of society (I'm not totally sure that is what you're saying, but I'm not sure it isn't either). You're right in saying that other religions are just as bad is of no help but (on here at least) I don't think that is what many people have said. What has been said is that there are some odious comparisons from the OT and the Q'uran but that most Christians do not take this literally and nor do most Muslims. Also that Christianity as a whole has moved away from literal interpretation and in most instances so has Islam.
The very real problem is the significant minority of Muslims that do profess to adhere to the literal interpretation and then spread this insanity. A willingness to openly confront this problem, from both Muslims and non-Muslims has to be the way to at least start to solve the problem.
Increasingly people are realising there is not an easy answer or silver bullet. The least shite solution is the best solution. And to me a shite, but least shite solution is actually dealing with an entire religion as you cannot deal with only part of it.
I can understand that point of view but I just don't think it is anywhere near viable. We, Western type democracies, need to have the sane majority of Muslims inside our tent pissing out rather than outside and pissing in. Try and deal with an entire religion (how do you even do that) and you will alienate huge numbers of people, likely making the situation a whole lot worse.
-
@JC said in Another attack in London:
@taniwharugby Yeah, I guess that's my fault. I could have left out the original lone wolf reference. Sorry about that.
Not sure that was directly responsible JC ...
-
@Catogrande said in Another attack in London:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in Another attack in London:
@Catogrande said in Another attack in London:
@Rancid-Schnitzel I fully agree with your first part, denial is rife and the first step has to be a willingness to confront the issue and we see precious little will in this regard.
I have a degree of sympathy for your second part but it does not sit well with me that the alternative to not confronting the issue is to blanket blame an entire religion or section of society (I'm not totally sure that is what you're saying, but I'm not sure it isn't either). You're right in saying that other religions are just as bad is of no help but (on here at least) I don't think that is what many people have said. What has been said is that there are some odious comparisons from the OT and the Q'uran but that most Christians do not take this literally and nor do most Muslims. Also that Christianity as a whole has moved away from literal interpretation and in most instances so has Islam.
The very real problem is the significant minority of Muslims that do profess to adhere to the literal interpretation and then spread this insanity. A willingness to openly confront this problem, from both Muslims and non-Muslims has to be the way to at least start to solve the problem.
Increasingly people are realising there is not an easy answer or silver bullet. The least shite solution is the best solution. And to me a shite, but least shite solution is actually dealing with an entire religion as you cannot deal with only part of it.
I can understand that point of view but I just don't think it is anywhere near viable. We, Western type democracies, need to have the sane majority of Muslims inside our tent pissing out rather than outside and pissing in. Try and deal with an entire religion (how do you even do that) and you will alienate huge numbers of people, likely making the situation a whole lot worse.
It's a tough one, as it's becoming increasingly difficult to separate them out. I expressed my frustration in the other thread when I saw a young Muslim woman hit right at the heart of the issue, only for two other 'moderate' Muslims to either lie about what was happening, or completely obfuscate her point to avoid addressing it.
I also wonder when people like @Godder talk about 'mainstream' Islam what they mean exactly - Muslims in the west or Muslims in, say, Saudi Arabia?
-
Certainly no easy answers. All I know is not talking about it has and will continue to fail. Proper investigations into Mosques linked with extremism and extremist speakers would be a great start particularly those financed by Saudi. Removing laws against 'Offending' people such as Australias 18C, as this simply shuts down discussion since anyone can be offended by anything. Reviewing immigration and travel to and from countries associated with terrorism. Proper reviews into prisons and the islamic extremism being propagated there. Crack down on those on existing watchlists.
As for what we can do now. Talk with people about the issue, give them your perspective. Ask your political parties how they intend to deal with the problem. Find out about groups that make a stand against extremism (Quillam, Q Society), maybe join them and participate in discussions or donate to their cause. Publicly support those who do make a stand. Read the Qu'ran, hone your arguments and challenge those with differing views. Make a loud noise when leftists start trying to implement motions or policies to protect these extremists like Canada's M-103. Don't be afraid to use the word 'Islamic' when talking about islamic extremism. They are inexorably linked.
-
@Kirwan said in Another attack in London:
Obama wouldn't even say the words Islamic Terrorism, that's how far down the appeasement path we are.
The Leader of the Opposition in Australia studiously avoided saying anything that might narrow the potential ideology of the attackers, despite what they were reported saying when they jumped out of their van.
Another minister said at least 10 times that we should remain vigilant but neglected to mention what we should be looking for. Speeding vans on pavements I guess.
-
@antipodean Sickening isn't it. I guess they just want to avoid having egg on their face when its discovered that the terrorists were really white football hooligans right?
Weak and pathetic.
Tommy Robinson (who isn't known to pull punches) makes a great point as to what will happen if the authorities don't actually do something people will start taking things into their own hands then you'll really have an extremist problem.
-
@No-Quarter said in Another attack in London:
I also wonder when people like @Godder talk about 'mainstream' Islam what they mean exactly - Muslims in the west or Muslims in, say, Saudi Arabia?
Is there such a thing as "mainstream" Islam?
If you look at Christianity there is a fairly codified hierarchy there, even if there are about the same number of sects in Christianity as there is Islam and Judaism. If you look at Catholicism, you're picking up about half of them (ignoring the breakaways), and they've all got a structure in place.
Islam seems more heterogenuous even if the broad belief structures are still the same for a number of the 70-odd sects or interpretations or what have you. Some of the ones claiming to be the same interpret their shit differently e.g. that article someone (@dk ?) linked a while back from the Atlantic that compared Salafism from the terrorist standpoint against the "quietist" Salafis.
-
@NTA said in Another attack in London:
@No-Quarter said in Another attack in London:
I also wonder when people like @Godder talk about 'mainstream' Islam what they mean exactly - Muslims in the west or Muslims in, say, Saudi Arabia?
Is there such a thing as "mainstream" Islam?
If you look at Christianity there is a fairly codified hierarchy there, even if there are about the same number of sects in Christianity as there is Islam and Judaism. If you look at Catholicism, you're picking up about half of them (ignoring the breakaways), and they've all got a structure in place.
Islam seems more heterogenuous even if the broad belief structures are still the same for a number of the 70-odd sects or interpretations or what have you. Some of the ones claiming to be the same interpret their shit differently e.g. that article someone (@dk ?) linked a while back from the Atlantic that compared Salafism from the terrorist standpoint against the "quietist" Salafis.
I can see the point there Nick, but this apparently independent and non-structured religion that is powerless to produce a united front in tackling terrorism often appears to be incredibly united and on the same page when there is a grievance or something to bitch about.
-
-
@Tim said in Another attack in London:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=11869637
Nice rhetoric, but she has been charge for awhile and home secretary for even longer and did jack shit.
-
@canefan That is absolutely right and not very well understood by those defending it. Most people I know who are coming like white knights to defend all things islamic over the last few hours know incredibly little about the religion. They've never read the texts, they don't know the history, all they see is a different flavoured Christianity but one that is marginalised and must be protected at all costs unlike Christianity which is the foundation of all that is evil.
-
@Baron-Silas-Greenback The UK election seems worse than Trump vs Hillary. I'm leaning towards the Tory's as they probably won't try and combat terrorists with hugs and compliments..probably.
-
This from Brendan O'Neill hits the nail on the head perfectly
One of the major problems we face is not that our society is too mean about Islam, but that it flatters Islam too much. Islam now enjoys the same kind of moral protection from blasphemy and ridicule that Christianity once (wrongly) enjoyed. All last week I received furious emails and messages in response to two articles I wrote about the Manchester attack, telling me that using the word Islamist is Islamophobic, because it demeans Islam and its adherents by suggesting they have something to do with terrorism. This is why our political leaders so rarely use the terms Islamism, radical Islam and Islamic terrorism: because they want to avoid offending Islam and also because they don't want to stir up what they view as the public's bovine, hateful prejudices. This censorious privilege is not extended to any other religion. We do not avoid saying "Catholic paedophiles" about the priests who molested children for fear of tarring all Catholics with the same brush. We happily say "Christian fundamentalist"about people who are Christian and fundamentalist. We use "Buddhist extremists" to describe violent Buddhist groups in Myanmar. Only Islam is ringfenced from tough discussion; only terms that at some level include the word "Islam" are tightly policed; only criticism of Islam is deemed a mental illness -- Islamophobia.
This is incredibly dangerous. This censorious flattery of Islam is, in my view, a key contributor to the violence we have seen in recent years. Because when you constantly tell people that any mockery of their religion is tantamount to a crime, is vile and racist and unacceptable, you actively invite them, encourage them in fact, to become intolerant. You license their intolerance; you inflame their violent contempt for anyone who questions their dogmas; you provide a moral justification for their desire to punish those who insult their religion. From the 7/7 bombers to the Charlie Hebdo murderers to Salman Abedi in Manchester, all these terrorists -- Islamist terrorists -- expressed an extreme victim mentality and openly said they were punishing us for our disrespect of Islam, mistreatment of Muslims, ridiculing of Muhammad, etc. The Islamophobia industry and politicians who constantly say "Islam is great, leave Islam alone!" green-light this violence; they furnish it with a moral case and moral zeal.
There are no quick fixes to the terror problem, but here is a good start: oppose all censorship and all clampdowns on offence and blasphemy and so-called "Islamophobia". Every single one of them, whether they're legal, in the form of hate-speech laws, or informal, in the guise of self-censoring politicians being literally struck dumb on TV because they cannot muster up the word "Is...is...is...islamist". This will at least start the process of unravelling the Islamist victimhood narrative and its bizarre, violent and officially sanctioned sensitivity to criticism. And if anyone says this is "punching down" -- another intellectual weapon in the armoury of Islam-protecting censorship -- tell them that it is in fact punching up: up against a political class and legal system that has foolishly and outrageously sought to police criticism of a religion. This means that the supposedly correct response to terror attacks -- "don't criticise Islam" -- is absolutely the worst response. Making criticism of Islam as commonplace and acceptable as criticism of any other religion or ideology is the first step to denuding Islamist terrorism of its warped moral programme, and it will also demonstrate that our society prizes freedom of speech over everything else -- including your religion, your God, your prophets, your holy book and your feelings.
Another attack in London