View Full Version : Thoughts to London Bombs
Tugmistress
07-Jul-05, 11:13
:~(
Several explsions on the underground, several bus bombs and possibly a train crash too.
Bum
:(
~~Tides~~
07-Jul-05, 13:09
1 Bus bomb, 6 out side tube stations.
My thoughts are with all those killed and injured and their families. :( [mad]
I just hope this is a wake up call for all those that thought it couldn't happen to us AND to those countries that thought they were immune to terrorist attacks.
al-queda
i have family down that way hoping they are ok just waiting on news
suprised its not gleneagles they are attacking
al-queda
i have family down that way hoping they are ok just waiting on news
suprised its not gleneagles they are attacking
think they took the chance of the diversion of gleneagles to do this.
My thoughts are with all those who have family and friends caught up in this awful tragedy.
What a contrast to yesterday when everyone was celebrating the Olympics being held in London!
It is so sad. :(
Margaret M.
07-Jul-05, 20:32
Liz, my feelings too. So very sad.
On my job, I made many visits to London. I have fond memories of my time there. My heart goes out to the victims caught up in this tragedy. I remember those who reached out to the victims of the Twin Towers in New York with their response of concern for the victims there. I pray for better times ahead for all of us and for God's protection. We must stick together against those who purpetrate these cowardly deeds.
Malcolmdog
07-Jul-05, 22:03
How sad - my prayers go out to all of the families touched by these madmen.
We are being warned here in Toronto to be "vigilant about our surroundings"! and not to target identifiable groups of people! How Canadian - a generic warning!!
our politicians have spent the day reassuring Canadians that we are VERY unlikely targets! I wonder where they get their intelligence from - the comic pages? to match our cartoon PM - Mr. Martin a.k.a Mr. Dithers.
Take care. Malcolmdog.
neep_docker
07-Jul-05, 22:51
The blood is on Blair's hands. If you mess about with the sort of people who do this, then you can only expect this to happen.
Thanks Tony - we'd just about managed to stop the IRA blowing up parts of the country, when you and your cousin Dubbya decided it would be a good idea to poke the snake in the middle east.
We're probably unlikely to have another attack like this for a long time, but the effect is achieved in that you can now expect to see all sorts of draconian measures applied to our freedom.
And it's pathetic to see Tony and chums at Gleneagles to be protected from the evil of the world by a 5 mile exclusion zone and 10,000 police men, when ordinary Joe going to work in London gets no protection. Apparently the police knew something was going to happen as they called the Israeli Embassay as someone important was going there and to tell them not to go.
But then, we're all expendable.
neep docker, The blood is on Al-Quaida's hands, no one else's. They're doing these terrorist acts without provocation, like on 9/11. They seem have an intolerance for any other way of life besides their own.
Do we need to debate the whys and wherefores? At this moment in time out thoughts should be with the families that have been bereaved and those who have suffered shock and injury.
How can you be so crass at a time like this neep_docker? IMHO htwood and Lizz are spot-on. Similarly for the other posts above. Such violence is outrageous, irrespective of the perpetrator. You are totally out of order.
The blood is on Blair's hands. If you mess about with the sort of people who do this, then you can only expect this to happen.
Thanks Tony - we'd just about managed to stop the IRA blowing up parts of the country, when you and your cousin Dubbya decided it would be a good idea to poke the snake in the middle east.
We're probably unlikely to have another attack like this for a long time, but the effect is achieved in that you can now expect to see all sorts of draconian measures applied to our freedom.
And it's pathetic to see Tony and chums at Gleneagles to be protected from the evil of the world by a 5 mile exclusion zone and 10,000 police men, when ordinary Joe going to work in London gets no protection. Apparently the police knew something was going to happen as they called the Israeli Embassay as someone important was going there and to tell them not to go.
But then, we're all expendable.
I see this is neep_doctor first post. Perhaps he has no feelings for the victims and does not know how to respond to victims of tragedy.
Hello to all of you.
I'm new to this forum, but not to Caithness or Thurso. I had the privilege of living in your wonderful community from May 1985 until November 1987. During that time I met so many wonderfully friendly, caring people and I have carried those memories with me ever since. Later, I was stationed near Haverfordwest, Dyfed, and again was met with kindness and wonderfully warm-hearted people.
Many of us, who lived in, or near, Thurso while stationed at the Naval Communications Station, have so many fond memories of the time we spent there. Most of us felt such a strong bond with all of you. It is that bond that made the news we heard today so painful to hear.
All of you, and those in London, have been in our thoughts, prayers, and in our hearts today.
This evening, CNN International carried Sir Trevor MacDonald's program about the bombings, and during that program, he mentioned a man who had received an e-mail from an American friend. In that e-mail, the friend said that London had experienced its own 9/11 today, and that we understand what you are feeling. I hope you know that it is true. Our hearts grieve for those who were lost, and those who were so horribly injured.
This evening, I was chatting with a friend who was stationed at Navcommsta Thurso with me. We reminiced about so many things... Saturday's spent shopping in the High Street and talking to friends, both Scottish and American; the quiet, laid-back lifestyle; the smell of peat fires; shopping for old movies at Woolworth's; the Indian Take-away that use to be beside the launderette; evenings spent with friends in Shebster, followed by, absentmindedly, driving to the Thurso-Halkirk road on the wrong side of the road(!); Ronnie's Taxis; Fourth of July parties at Dunnet Beach; the Mey Games; shopping for sweaters at John O'Groats; driving 3 hours to Inverness, once a month to shop (much like the old days, when people would take their buckboards into town for supplies); but most especially the trust and friendliness all of you extended to us... people you had never met before... how welcome we always felt there.
Thank you, for being such a powerful force in our lives. Thank you, for the helping hand you were always so willing to extend to us. Thank you, for being such a wonderful, kind, caring community. In four overseas tours, I can honestly say that Thurso was the best!
God bless all of you, and may He watch over your very special island, particularly at this dreadful time.
Jan Thompson
Canton, Ohio
neep_docker
08-Jul-05, 08:20
I see this is neep_doctor first post. Perhaps he has no feelings for the victims and does not know how to respond to victims of tragedy.
Tragedy is all around us all the time.
40,000 people die in traffic accidents on Europe's roads every year.
Throughout the 1990s, over 2000 people were murdered in the city of New York (by fellow New Yorkers) every year.
Several hundred people are killed in preventable accidents in their workplace in the UK every year, and we are in the 21st Century.
As I type this, someone somewhere will die of starvation.
It's not the tragedy that we have to get into perspective, it's the travesty.
We all need to get very excitable about the latter, and not all sentimental about the former.
How can you be so crass at a time like this neep_docker? IMHO htwood and Lizz are spot-on. Similarly for the other posts above. Such violence is outrageous, irrespective of the perpetrator. You are totally out of order.
Well put as always DrSzin, neep-docker get your head out of the neep field, it seems to me that it was more than the shaws that were docked when you were done
How can you be so crass at a time like this neep_docker? IMHO htwood and Lizz are spot-on. Similarly for the other posts above. Such violence is outrageous, irrespective of the perpetrator. You are totally out of order.
Yes they are right and so are you, our thoughts should be with the families of the dead and injured and such violence is outrageous irrespective of the perpetrator.
Our thoughts should also be with the families of the innocent civillians killed and injured in the American air strike on a village in Afghanistan last week, such violence is also outrageous irrespective of the perpetrator.
neep_docker
08-Jul-05, 10:14
Our thoughts should also be with the families of the innocent civillians killed and injured in the American air strike on a village in Afghanistan last week, such violence is also outrageous irrespective of the perpetrator.
But this is precisely my point - I don't know a person killed on the London Underground yesterday, any more than I know an Iraqi police recruit killed in Iraq last week - the tradegy is the same, but I saw no outpouring of grief and sentimentality for the latter.
They are, in John Pilger's words, the "unpeople" - we don't need to care about them because they're not 'one of us'.
A life, is a life, is a life.
But what starts to become more scary, as history unfolds, is how much the hand of the allies in certain conflicts are found in the enemy. Exploring a lot of what actually happened in South America and Asia throughout the 50s, 60s and 70s, we find that the USA were backing insurgents and counter-insurgents (i.e. 'terrorists') while publicly decrying such behaviour, because it suited their own interests. The same thing was going on in the UK with the IRA (and may still be). It happened in Kosovo - we have dirty hands as a nation in all of this - our powers that be tut-tutted publicly while arming the terrorists at the same time.
Don't be surprised, 30 years from now, to read something rather disturbing about underhand involvement in events like this week.
weeboyagee
08-Jul-05, 10:26
...If you mess about with the sort of people who do this, then you can only expect this to happen....Thanks Tony - we'd just about managed to stop the IRA blowing up parts of the country, when you and your cousin Dubbya decided it would be a good idea to poke the snake in the middle east
Terrorist attacks did not start ONLY after the Iraq campaign! Innocent people have been victims of terrorist activity for years neep_docker - not just as a result of "poking a snake" in the middle east! I agree with htwood, the blood is on the hands of the terrorist group - no-one elses! Once you have resolved to this you can be as diverse as you like with what ever other thoughts you have on the matter but I think in your case neep_docker at this point in time, keep them to yourself! As usual , like most of your other contributions in these forums, you have managed to "poke the snake" yourself and raise the wrath of the majority of caithness.org visitors!
Who could not have been moved by the harrowing scenes last night on the TV or have that same feeling of uselessness when they heard what happened in London. I found out by email and 1 o' clock afternoon news. EVERYONE was silenced,...why?....loss of human life. I know that no-one in my company thought that the government were to blame - no-one! What they did think was profound sorrow for those killed, injured or had their lives turned upside down having done nothing to deserve it! Only a sad minority will have thought otherwise!
....see you've just posted again before I completed this one so I have edited this one after you,....a life is precisely that - A LIFE!!!! Who should be able to snuff out life before it's time without having to be held accountable for it?
Terrorist attacks did not start ONLY after the Iraq campaign! Innocent people have been victims of terrorist activity for years neep_docker - not just as a result of "poking a snake" in the middle east!
I agree with you entirely, you've hit the nail right on the head, there's nothing new here, it's been going on for years.
"The Arab and Kurd now know what real bombing means in casualties and
damage. Within forty-five minutes a full-size village can be practically
wiped out and a third of its inhabitants killed or injured."
Wing Commander Sir Arthur Harris, British Forces Iraq, 1924
neep_docker
08-Jul-05, 19:42
I agree with you entirely, you've hit the nail right on the head, there's nothing new here, it's been going on for years.
So why such an intensity of emotion then, if Thursday in London was just basically 'business as usual' ?
5 people were killed in a head-on car collision in the Lake District this week - where's all the focus and over-reaction over that tragedy ? Nothing more than a passing column inch in the national press - but it's still a set of innocent lives snuffed out just like that right under our noses. And, like most road 'accidents' it would appear to be no accident - one of those involved decided they would be beyond the law.
We need to all get a sense of proportion rather than jump on the hysteria bandwagon just because the press or politicians or the do-gooders brow beat us into doing so. And everytime we are shocked by something like this, we should be understanding why - it's ignorance that leads to all of this sort of activity.
Margaret M.
08-Jul-05, 19:47
Jan, that was a lovely post. There is something very haunting about Scotland -- many whom have visited think it is like no other place and they are drawn back to it without really knowing why.
It seems Neepdocker that you see no difference between an “accident” and a premeditated act. A person or group of people planned the action in London, they planned it to kill people, a car accident however tragic is a totally different scenario – the outcome of both events do warrant sympathy, but cannot be considered in the same magnitude.
To plan an indiscriminate act such as placing bombs on public transport is beyond my understanding.
neep_docker
09-Jul-05, 12:31
To plan an indiscriminate act such as placing bombs on public transport is beyond my understanding.
To overtake, over a solid white line, on a bend, in front of on-coming traffic at speeds of over 80mph is also way beyond my understanding, and it's premeditated ...... you don't just happen to find yourself doing that unvoluntarily - we've just been conditioned as a society to accept this more than accepting someone with a grudge deliberately causing havoc.
The other problem is of course that society will always have a handful of nutters - like Thomas Hamilton at the Dunblane school, or that idiot who caused the accident on the Aberdeen / Inverness road that wiped out 3 members of a family. But these people are always single isolated incidents, whereas people who undertake terrorist attacks have a cause. And to have a cause, you must first be agrieved. And this country has agrieved a heck of a lot of people in the world by being the yes man to the world's greatest nutter, Dubbya Bush.
I end up in the US quite regularly with my work, and I think Dubbya would spend his time better focusing on issues at home. The poverty, crime, corruption and violence in his own country is quite dispicable. If that's the way of life the rest of the world is supposed to aspire to, then I think I'd rather live under the rule of Martians.
To overtake, over a solid white line, on a bend, in front of on-coming traffic at speeds of over 80mph is also way beyond my understanding, and it's premeditated ...... you don't just happen to find yourself doing that unvoluntarily - we've just been conditioned as a society to accept this more than accepting someone with a grudge deliberately causing havoc.
Whilst I agree that such a course of action is crazy, the intention would not be to deliberately kill those in the oncoming car......although that may be the result. The premeditated act is to get to the destination quicker, not to kill those in the oncoming car.
then I think I'd rather live under the rule of Martians.
Do they tolerate indesciminate killing of humans then?
Neep-docker you appear to be tyhe only one "anywhere" that I have heard not condeming these acts..........even Hamas did so...........are you martian?
wavy davy
09-Jul-05, 16:31
I diidn't read that neepdocker didn't condemn the bombings. What he is saying is that he feels that Blair and Bush, by their actions in Iraq and elsewhere, may well have provoked the bombings. That's a legitimate point of view - one shared by many people -nearly every national daily yesterday carried an article by a journalist saying exactly the same thing. What happened to freedom of expression on this board.
Neep-docker you appear to be tyhe only one "anywhere" that I have heard not condeming these acts..........even Hamas did so...........are you martian?
Yes, most of the Muslim world condemns the evil terrorists that are behind atrocities such as this.
While in the Christian world we re-elect them.
[quote="wavy davy" What happened to freedom of expression on this board.[/quote]
Hi Wavy Davy, were you ever an act on Novelty Island? Sure there was an act by that name once upon a time. Certainly, everyone is free to express themselves. Neep Docker or Neep Docker2 or Neep Docker3, as I consider him to be, is free to say anything he wishes to.
We, as other members of the board are equally free to state that we think his opinions/views are utter crap!! THAT is freedom of expression my friend. Many anarchists think that freedom of expression means that THEY talk and WE listen without comment.
The bottom line is that terrorism should never be accepted, no matter how poor or complicit you think your leaders are, it is bad news to even think about conceding to the terrorist. Otherwise how could society flourish? Every time there was a problem, someone would threaten to blow everyone else to bits. What do you do? Conceed to every aggressor? Bow to every threat? Lie down to every aerosol with a chip on their shoulder?
Instead, we say to terrorists - F U. Away and die like the scum you are and let humans get on with living.
wavy davy
10-Jul-05, 01:37
Scorrie,
You say that
" We, as other members of the board are equally free to state that we think his opinions/views are utter crap!! THAT is freedom of expression my friend. Many anarchists think that freedom of expression means that THEY talk and WE listen without comment."
Other responses to neep's posts include the following language;
[i]How can you be so crass at a time like this neep_docker? IMHO htwood and Lizz are spot-on. Similarly for the other posts above. Such violence is outrageous, irrespective of the perpetrator. You are totally out of order.
I see this is neep_doctor first post. Perhaps he has no feelings for the victims and does not know how to respond to victims of tragedy.
Well put as always DrSzin, neep-docker get your head out of the neep field, it seems to me that it was more than the shaws that were docked when you were done
Neep-docker you appear to be tyhe only one "anywhere" that I have heard not condeming these acts..........even Hamas did so...........are you martian?
Hardly the language of an adult debate methinks.
As I said before, neep was making a legitimate point about our "leaders" playing with our safety. I don't see how that translates into being an anarchist, not deploring terrorism, not feeling sympathy for victims etc.
Got this from a pal in England...what can I say!!!!
You come to place your bags of hate
On bus and train, you made us late
Yet we’ll be back again tomorrow
We’ll carry on despite our sorrow
Your bags of hate caused some to die
Yet we stride out strong with heads held high
You’ll never win, we will not bow
You can’t defeat us, you don’t know how
This London which we love with pride
Is a town where scum like you can’t hide
Don’t worry we will hunt you down
Then Lock you up in name of Crown
We’re London and we’re many races
Just look you’ll see our stoic faces
We all condemn your heinous act
You will not win and that’s a fact
We’ll mourn our dead and shed a tear
But we will not bow to acts of fear
You’re out there somewhere all alone
There’s nowhere now you can call home
Olympics ours we’ve won the race
Your timing then a real disgrace
Our strength you’ll find remains unbowed
We’re London and we’re very proud.
ok Wavy Davy, lets discuss the following statements made by Neep-Docker:
The blood is on Blair's hands. If you mess about with the sort of people who do this, then you can only expect this to happen.
Thanks Tony - we'd just about managed to stop the IRA blowing up parts of the country, when you and your cousin Dubbya decided it would be a good idea to poke the snake in the middle east.
In the first paragraph he blames Blair for the London bombings, in the second he goes on to take part of the "credit" for stopping the IRA bombing campaign. Now if I am not mistaken the NI peace process includes the government, and therefore Blair.....so should he not get ALL the credit for that? Or maybe WE are all guilty for the bombings in London? Maybe you could enlighten me?
Without going into arguments on the event, I am saddened that there are photographs of the scene of the explosion on the bus, taken 30 seconds after the event. Instead of providing assistance to the injured, it appears that peoples' first instinct now - is to take photographs/videos. The same thing was apparent after the Tsunami last year.
To all of these people............SHAME!
neep_docker
10-Jul-05, 09:27
Thank goodness one or two people have now managed to get around to saying something rational here, instead of being brain washed into the standard sentimental response to these types of situations.
The English have this incessant habit of rubbing other peoples up the wrong way, then invariably sending in the Scottish to fight their battles - this has gone on for hundreds of years.
The IRA bombed England (and not Scotland and Wales) because some people had a cause to be agrieved (rightly or wrongly) with the English. Let's just hope that the current wave of cheesed off foreigners know the geographic and cultural difference between these countries as well.
And on the subject of sentimentality, I notice that we are all now being expected to have a co-ordinate two-minute silence this Thursday. If we had a two-minute silence for every tragedy in the world, then we'd allbe Trapest Monks. Why don't we all have a two-minute rant instead.
In the first paragraph he blames Blair for the London bombings, in the second he goes on to take part of the "credit" for stopping the IRA bombing campaign. Now if I am not mistaken the NI peace process includes the government, and therefore Blair.....so should he not get ALL the credit for that? Or maybe WE are all guilty for the bombings in London? Maybe you could enlighten me?
A lot of funding for the IRA came from America and there are still known IRA bombers wanted by the British government living in the United States which America refuses to extradite. The IRA bombing campaign didn't just happen, there were historical reasons
why there were people in Ireland who felt justified in committing such atrocities not least of which was genocide. The famine which starved to death a quarter of the population of Ireland was not caused by potato blight, Ireland still had plenty of grain, meat and dairy products, more than enough to feed the population. They were exported to protect the prices in England, exported in ships guarded by British troops from the starving Irish.
I don't think there is any doubt now that our invasion of Iraq had nothing to do with weapons of mass destruction, that was just the excuse not the reason. The reason is obvious, we wanted to control the second largest undeveloped oil reserves in the world
because our way of life, the civilisation we have built, depends on oil and just as we starved to death 2million Irish to protect the price of grain we invaded Iraq to protect the price of oil.
The people of Britain and America saw the loss of life in the Middle East every morning on their TVs and they just did not care. The people of Briatain and America have watched the American backed oppression of the Palestinian people by Israel every day for decades and they just did not care. The people of Britain and America knew all this before the last elections when they had the chance to make their voice heard but they just did not care.
So without going into debate about the conflicts and history that led to the IRAs campaign of terror, you agree that the underlying causes are still there…….but their campaign in the UK has stopped (it could start again), why? Are you saying that the Government had nothing to do with this?
Also in terms of the Middle East, the case of Palestine is always trotted out, and for some reason everyone in the UK seems to think that the USA is to blame for their funding of the Zionist state of Israel……..speak to anyone in the Middle East and it is always Britain that is blamed for the state of Israel. Surely that cannot be laid at the door of Blair as well.
Scorrie,
Hardly the language of an adult debate methinks.
As I said before, neep was making a legitimate point about our "leaders" playing with our safety. I don't see how that translates into being an anarchist, not deploring terrorism, not feeling sympathy for victims etc.
Not quite sure why you are trotting all these quotes out again. My point is, that your Neepy friend in whichever incarnation he is currently under, IS getting his freedom to speak and others are getting their freedom to reply.
There always seems to be a section of any board that think they are more intellectual, mature, adult or whatever than other posters. Perhaps we should go the whole hog and remove the right to vote from these supposedly inferior intellects. After all, such people are clearly not equipped to make an informed decision on who should govern our country.
Yer man is getting his say, others have disagreed. If you are not happy with that then perhaps you should be more adult about it.
wavy davy
10-Jul-05, 14:32
Scotsboy
You're absolutely right about Britain bearing the initial responsibility for the Palestine situation. However, I disagree that this is the way that the situaion is currently perceived by populist opinion in the Middle East. The USA is seen as the force that has allowed Israel to flourish - Britain is reviled for it's more recent political and military support of the USA. However, that's splitting hairs.
The more important point is that made by Fred. Yes, we are all to blame for the London bombings.
We elected ( and reelected ) a Government which is complicit in USA support for Israel and participated in an armed invasion of a country which threatened neither us nor the USA, all for the continuation of a supply of cheap energy for the West.
If you doubt that analysis of the reason for invading Iraq, consider that North Korea poses a much greater "clear and present danger" to world peace than Iraq ever did but a) they don't have oil b) the Americans know that they would get their arse kicked if they tried that one on.
Given our self serving actions in a region which is predominantly Muslim, with all that entails in terms of the Muslim perception of themselves as a britherhood, is it surprising that we've managed to mightily piss off a large number of people.
I'm as appalled as anyone by their methods of warfare but given their lack of conventional military might this is the only way that they can strike back.
The prospect of the coming years of terrorist attacks is far from pleasant, but we can hardly say "it wisnae us mister - honest". We're ultimately and rightly collectively responsible for the actions of our leaders and we're now facing the consequences.
I live in the Middle East and think that I may have a slightly better "feel" for what the opinion is......as for the rest of your post its mince. If you think these bombings have anything to do with Iraq, you are wrong.
wavy davy
10-Jul-05, 16:55
Scotsboy,
I've a wee bit of experience oif the Middle East myself, but I'll bow to your more contemporary view of that part of the world.
If the explosions have nothing to do with the Americans and Brits in Palestine and Iraq, then what have they got to do with?
BTW, I'm a bit hurt at your description of my post as "mince". It took me 15 minutes to write that. All right, I know, I should have spent the time doing something useful.
Thank goodness one or two people have now managed to get around to saying something rational here, instead of being brain washed into the standard sentimental response to these types of situations.
The English have this incessant habit of rubbing other peoples up the wrong way, then invariably sending in the Scottish to fight their battles - this has gone on for hundreds of years.
The IRA bombed England (and not Scotland and Wales) because some people had a cause to be agrieved (rightly or wrongly) with the English. Let's just hope that the current wave of cheesed off foreigners know the geographic and cultural difference between these countries as well.
And on the subject of sentimentality, I notice that we are all now being expected to have a co-ordinate two-minute silence this Thursday. If we had a two-minute silence for every tragedy in the world, then we'd allbe Trapest Monks. Why don't we all have a two-minute rant instead.
I actually agree with you that BRITAIN's (not Englands) involvement MAY have catalysed a very small number of sick individuals to explode those bombs in London.
But you are being very insensitive to other posters and to the victim's families FTM on this thread to spew cheap England vs Scottish propaganda. This thread was intended to let us express our condolences to the victim's families, not for you to issue neo-leftwing-Scottish Nationalist and isolationist Rhetoric.
Shame on you
neep_docker
10-Jul-05, 18:05
This thread was intended to let us express our condolences to the victim's families
You see, here we go with this contrived sentimentality again.
Throughout most of March and April 2003, the US and British armed forces rode right through Iraq killing 100,000s of innocent people in their path, in order to take out just one wanted man. Yet when they found that man, they didn't kill him, they decidedhe should have a fair trial - unlike the 100,000s of innocent civilians left dead in their wake. Once again, they are the 'unpeople' - they don't matter, they're just caught in the cross-fire.
Now, where were you all with a thread to express your condolences then ?
The people who died in London last Thursday were likewise innocent people caught in the crossfire. To me they are equal to the ones I described above. No more, no less.
Let's just cut out the hypocrisy, please.
BTW, I'm a bit hurt at your description of my post as "mince".
You asume that I dont like mince ;) :lol:
I just think that some compassion should be shown for the victims of this terrorist atrocity.
As for the reasons behind the attacks, they are long and detailed and would take more than the 15 minutes you took to cook your mince. However they relate to the enforced spread of Islam.
Now, where were you all with a thread to express your condolences then ?....Let's just cut out the hypocrisy, please.
On your first point, just look back at any thread on the Iraq war, you will see many expressions of grief for those caught up in the war.
On your second point, Here, Here! You are the one who sees our sentimentality as contrived, my feelings were from the heart...
neep_docker
10-Jul-05, 21:07
On your second point, Here, Here! You are the one who sees our sentimentality as contrived, my feelings were from the heart...
But where, oh where is the outpouring of grief for today's tragedy, then ........
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4668721.stm
Yes, as I thought, passed without mention by the masses.
wavy davy
10-Jul-05, 21:12
Scotsboy,
I must admit to being perplexed as to why a belief that the US and Britain's stance in the Middle East contributes to terrorism, somehow implies a lack of compassion for the victims of said terrorism. In my case at least, nothing is further from the truth.
As for your belief that the aforesaid stance has nothing to do with the bombings, judging by the papers today you seem to be in a minority. Admittedly that doesn't mean you're wrong. It means that MI5, MI6 and a large number of politicians and correspondents are. Mega mince.
But where, oh where is the outpouring of grief for today's tragedy, then ........
Yes, as I thought, passed without mention by the masses.
During the height of the dark days of IRA terrorism, there were countless acts of terrorism which were all worthy of outspoken Public condolence. However, the British Public ceased to be terrorised by it, they just got conditioned to it and thus unnewsworthy. This apathy imho played a part in the IRA surrender. Islamic terrorism will have the same affect on the British Public, they will just get on with their lives, as in the Blitz.
Just because the routine acts of terror that go on in Iraq go unmentioned doesn't mean they are unworthy of condolent commentary, we have already started to get conditioned to it, you can also call it resilience.
If you want to thrash out whether I think your insensitive comments re Eng v Scot or whether Scottish isolationism have any relevence to modern Islamic terrorism then start a new thread and lets get it on.
neep_docker
10-Jul-05, 21:44
Just because the routine acts of terror that go on in Iraq go unmentioned doesn't mean they are unworthy of condolent commentary, we have already started to get conditioned to it, you can also call it resilience.
In that case, let's speed up that resilience by ignoring the London bombings and not mentioning it again.
Just because the routine acts of terror that go on in Iraq go unmentioned doesn't mean they are unworthy of condolent commentary, we have already started to get conditioned to it, you can also call it resilience.
In that case, let's speed up that resilience by ignoring the London bombings and not mentioning it again.
Don't worry, if it starts to happen on a daily occurence then you will have your wish come true. But when they start targetting Edinburgh and Glasgow as a direct result of supposed 'extra attention' in Iraq given by (English coerced )Scottish roadside bombfodder then which side will you be on? Do you see Londoner lives as less important than those of Glaswegian's?
So far you have suggested that terrorism in London is unworthy of mentioning but Scotland is worth protecting and Terrorism in Iraq is worth mentioning, I cannot understand this disparity?
As Bush says, 'You are either with us or with the terrorists'
neep_docker
10-Jul-05, 22:28
As Bush says, 'You are either with us or with the terrorists'
Oh, please ! With nonesense like that, you are the perfect embodiment of the drones who regurgitate rhetoric. You know the price of everything, but the value of nothing.
As Bush says, 'You are either with us or with the terrorists'
Oh, please ! With nonesense like that, you are the perfect embodiment of the drones who regurgitate rhetoric. You know the price of everything, but the value of nothing.
Yet you still didn't address my points, I can only assume that you think that Londoner lives ARE less important than other nationalities.
The bigot is like the pupil of the eye, the more light you put upon it, the more it will contract.
neep_docker
10-Jul-05, 22:42
Yet you still didn't address my points, I can only assume that you think that Londoner lives ARE less important than other nationalities.
Yawn...bore....read the thread before typing....see previous post:
The people who died in London last Thursday were likewise innocent people caught in the crossfire. To me they are equal to the ones I described above. No more, no less.
Yet you still didn't address my points, I can only assume that you think that Londoner lives ARE less important than other nationalities.
Yawn...bore....read the thread before typing....see previous post:
The people who died in London last Thursday were likewise innocent people caught in the crossfire. To me they are equal to the ones I described above. No more, no less.
Yet why do you want us to pour out sentiments for every attack in Iraq but you want the attacks in London to be unmentioned?
read the thread before typing....
So without going into debate about the conflicts and history that led to the IRAs campaign of terror, you agree that the underlying causes are still there…….but their campaign in the UK has stopped (it could start again), why? Are you saying that the Government had nothing to do with this?
Also in terms of the Middle East, the case of Palestine is always trotted out, and for some reason everyone in the UK seems to think that the USA is to blame for their funding of the Zionist state of Israel……..speak to anyone in the Middle East and it is always Britain that is blamed for the state of Israel. Surely that cannot be laid at the door of Blair as well.
Britain must take it's share of the blame for the state of Isreal, as must Turkey, but America is the one largely responsible.
Zionism started long before the British Mandate. In the 19th century when Palestine was still part of the Ottoman empire, people in Turkey aquired land in Palestine through a legal loophole which they sold to the Zionists. Palestine was a British Mandate from 1920 to partitioning in 1948 and responsible for much of the Jewish settlement. There were a lot of Jewish refugees around from Germany and Eastern Europe and it was convenient for us. They were also responsible for the rather brutal putting down of a Palestinian Nationalist uprising in the 1930s. As for the creation of the state of Israel that was down to the Americans, they put preasure on a lot of poorer nations to get it passed by the UN. Since then Israel has been backed, armed and financed by the United States, including helping them to develop nuclear weapons in partnership with pre-apartheid South Africa and become the worlds sixth largest nuclear power.
There was also a lot of resentment against Britain because we promised the Arab countries of the Ottoman Empire indipendance in exchange for backing us in the first world war, a promise we broke. As for what happens in Northern Ireland, that will depend a lot on how many promises are broken there.
neep_docker
10-Jul-05, 23:01
Excellent, fred - at last someone in the forum who can bring an informed and eloquent contribution to the debate.
In the 1990s, Israel was the world's 4th largest military power, I believe. It may still be, not sure. But Israel, as you point out, is yet another example of how we back terrorism in one country, but condemn it in another.
As far as I am aware, Israel armed itself in response to terrorism from factions from within itself and outwith its borders. A nation has a soveregn right to defend itself.
neep_docker
10-Jul-05, 23:14
Rheghead, how many times do we have to flush before you go away ? If you can't contribute something of merit, then don't contribute at all.
I have been totally civil with you on this forum, yet you recourse to rudeness. I will leave you comments to the disgression of the moderators. Obvious you have nothing of merit to add to this thread. You have been well and truly beaten my friend!!
I am not leaving myself to be insulted on this thread again. Bye
neep_docker
10-Jul-05, 23:30
What does "disgression" mean ? You've certainly beaten me (and possibly every other English language speaker) on that one.
You were dismissive and rude neep_docker.
The tragedy in London is exactly that a tragedy. The comments on this forum reflect that and they reflect the fact that most of us can identify clearly with the victims - we have ridden on the tube and we have walked along streets in london and can visualise these things and that makes the tragedy more real to us. We can think "gosh i was at kings cross last week last year" - we connect with these people whether they be black white muslim christian or jew or pink with purple spots on - we can see ourselves in their shoes because this happened in London.
The outpouring of grief and shock is absolutely right. You compare accidents to this but it is different, accidents are exactly that. Interestingly you mention the inverness man responsible for a car crash caused by his stupidity. It should be remembered that the man committed suicide because he could not live with the results of his stupid and irresponsible action. Thats what he was stupid - not evil. The attacks in London are the result of unspeakable evil which we cannot comprehend. We SHOULD be expressing our horror - it is horrific that human beings can plan and execute such action solely to kill and maim as many people as possible. Because we can connect with these people - it is all the more real to us and our anger and horror easier to express.
The situation in Israel is a difficult one for many people - including myself - to understand. I agree that abhorrant acts are taking place there and that there are daily tragedies - I belive that Israel has overstepped the mark from legitimate defensive action and is guilty of crimes which should not be ignored but this does not excuse terrorism in London it does not diminish the horror and pain we feel at the attacks in london, no cause is so strong that terrorism is the RIGHT way to proceed - ever.
neep_docker
10-Jul-05, 23:55
We SHOULD be expressing our horror
It's the way it is expressed that's the problem. With spin in politics, sensationalism in news reporting and ignorance at large in society, we end up with extreme sentimentality but no focus on accountability.
There was classic cartoon a few years ago that summed up this enforced outrage and grieving that is expected of us all these days - it depicted someone lying maimed in the road, surrounded by a circle of on-lookers, while someone pushes through the crowd shouting, "let me through ! let me through ! I'm an innocent bystander with a floral tribute!"
Q.E.D.
As for your belief that the aforesaid stance has nothing to do with the bombings, judging by the papers today you seem to be in a minority. Admittedly that doesn't mean you're wrong. It means that MI5, MI6 and a large number of politicians and correspondents are. Mega mince.
My belief is that these bombings would have occured even if British troops were not in Iraq, the simplistic cause and effect postulated by you and vast swathes of the media is......simplistic.
I also disagree that just because some mob of terrorists feel they have a "cause" does not mena that cause is just or noble - maybe you could enlighten us to the "cause" of AL Qeda, bearing in mind it was in existence prior to the invasion of Iraq.
Neep_docker you assume nobody knows or is aware of the Palestinian situation who appears to show sympathy for those effected by acts of Islamic extremists, arrogance in the extreme.
Whilst i accept your opinions and your right to voice them I do not agree with them. I have yet to hear you say that the victims of the London bombings are deserving of sympathy........stange when in the last few days I have been offered condolences by Saudis, Jordanians, Bahrainis, Palestinians, Omanis and Qataris.These people felt it necessary to apologise on behalf of others who they consider to be shaming their relgion - I must admit to being both humbled and embarrassed by their actions.
As far as I am aware, Israel armed itself in response to terrorism from factions from within itself and outwith its borders. A nation has a soveregn right to defend itself.
No.
"Before the end of the mandate and, therefore before any possible intervention by Arab states, the Jews, taking advantage of their superior military preparation and organization, had occupied...most of the Arab cities in Palestine before May 15, 1948. Tiberias was occupied on April 19, 1948, Haifa on April 22, Jaffa on April 28, the Arab quarters in the New City of Jerusalem on April 30, Beisan on May 8, Safad on May 10 and Acre on May 14, 1948...In contrast, the Palestine Arabs did not seize any of the territories reserved for the Jewish state under the partition resolution."
Henry Cattan, "Palestine, The Arabs and Israel."
As far as I am aware, Israel armed itself in response to terrorism from factions from within itself and outwith its borders. A nation has a soveregn right to defend itself.
No.
"Before the end of the mandate and, therefore before any possible intervention by Arab states, the Jews, taking advantage of their superior military preparation and organization, had occupied...most of the Arab cities in Palestine before May 15, 1948. Tiberias was occupied on April 19, 1948, Haifa on April 22, Jaffa on April 28, the Arab quarters in the New City of Jerusalem on April 30, Beisan on May 8, Safad on May 10 and Acre on May 14, 1948...In contrast, the Palestine Arabs did not seize any of the territories reserved for the Jewish state under the partition resolution."
Henry Cattan, "Palestine, The Arabs and Israel."
Are you saying that the US equipped the Jews prior to they knew that the UN was going to make the recognition of Israel in 1948? If they did then where is your evidence? Otherwise, you are on shakey ground in your assumption that it was the US who used its position to make Zionism into a credible force and in the light of that, they had to catalyse the rest of the UN to recognise the state of Israel.
I know that the US armed Israel post UN recognition, but only because of the threat of terrorism from its neighbours and from Palestinian insurgency. Please read carefully that my first comment was made in relation to circumstances that were after recognition, you presented an extract referring to a time before UN recognition, totally different circumstances.
we end up with extreme sentimentality but no focus on accountability.
I dont agree - there has been a focus on finding those accountable for this act of evil all the way through the press coverage. Some people think k our government is to blame for the atrocity but this is wrong and ignores the bigger picture. Extremists are just that - extreme and if the Uk had not been in Iraq then they would still have found a reason for attacking cos this is about power not anything else.
The only place to lay the blame for the bombings is at the feet of those responsible for commissioning, designing and carrying out the bombings - no where else. To lay it at the feet of the Government passes the buck and ignores individual responsibilty.
weeboyagee
11-Jul-05, 14:04
.....with spin in politics, sensationalism in news reporting and ignorance at large in society, we end up with extreme sentimentality but no focus on accountability.
Missed this thread for past few days,...nothing changes though. It matters little where I see the news of death through terrorism,...London, New York, N Ireland. The feeling of grief for the victim and relatives or friends, for me anyway, is not one that is geared by the media, the size of the newspaper column, how hard-hitting the front page or the picture is. It is the fact that lives were taken, a pre-determined removal of human beings from their right to exist.
I freely admit to my ignorance of the reality of the whole situation but it would make little difference to me if I were to be better informed. This forum was NOT to do with "we are as guilty as them when it comes to being terrorists"! It is to do with our thoughts on the bombs set off in London. OK, so Prime Ministers, Leaders of Countries, Government ministers, Mayors of New York and London were all seen to do their dutiful bit by a) condeming the act of atrocity and b) saying how much that their thoughts firstly are with the victims and their families BUT that doesn't mean that the rest of us do not genuinely relate to the reality of the situation and recognise it for what it is - an atrocity. The accountability will, I am sure, as far as the government is concerned be just as extreme with the sensationalism of what they are going to do with the perpetrators when they get their hands on them - or how no stone will be left unturned hunting them down.
At the end of the day, society has not and should not have an ability to dismiss the removal of life in such a manner with the "ahh well,....just another day in the run of the human race...!", which unfortunately is the representation of some of the posts on this forum to date.
Terrorists have little regard for life to undertake what they do. I have qualified agreement in saying that the sensationalism of reporting lends itself to being a stage for terrorists itself BUT we cannot let the effects of their acts on socitey receive any less attention LEST WE FORGET or worse, ignore!
Weeboyagee.
My feelings exactly..........I personally am shocked, stunned. and horrified at deliberate acts of terrorism anywhere in the world be it North,South, East or West in this planet of ours. This latest attrocity just seems that little bit closer and is hitting home harder.
AS i am from London, i have seen 1st hand bombs do to people and communites as the IRA were active when i was there. It doesnt give anyone any right to kill innocent people regardless of there religion, beiiefs or any reason really. If a 6 month old baby was killed in one of the blasts would you call that justified, as the baby would have never had a chance to upset anyone let alone speak of religion.
So i say its wrong and they do need to be caught.
I agree it would happen if we were in iraq or not we the british nation always voice our opinions, so we make good targets
As far as I am aware, Israel armed itself in response to terrorism from factions from within itself and outwith its borders. A nation has a soveregn right to defend itself.
No.
"Before the end of the mandate and, therefore before any possible intervention by Arab states, the Jews, taking advantage of their superior military preparation and organization, had occupied...most of the Arab cities in Palestine before May 15, 1948. Tiberias was occupied on April 19, 1948, Haifa on April 22, Jaffa on April 28, the Arab quarters in the New City of Jerusalem on April 30, Beisan on May 8, Safad on May 10 and Acre on May 14, 1948...In contrast, the Palestine Arabs did not seize any of the territories reserved for the Jewish state under the partition resolution."
Henry Cattan, "Palestine, The Arabs and Israel."
Are you saying that the US equipped the Jews prior to they knew that the UN was going to make the recognition of Israel in 1948?
I am saying that your statement " Israel armed itself in response to terrorism from factions from within itself and outwith its borders. " is not true, it is false.
Israel armed themselves so they could take as much of Palestine from its rightful owners by force as they could. They armed themselves to steal the land that the Palestinians forefarthers had worked for centuries and keep it for themselves.
I don't think what the citizens of a country do against an occupying foreign force counts as terrorism anyway. Were the French resistance fighters in the war terrorists? Strange we remember them as heros but there is no difference between what they did and what the Palenstinians do.
weeboyagee
11-Jul-05, 18:44
...were the French resistance fighters in the war terrorists?
Again, you're missing the point! Terrorists have taken their fight to the doorsteps of OUR land, not France, not Israel etc. but here on the doorstep of the UK. What was the aim of the terrorists who planted the bombs? Bring down the natioin and it's Zionist supportive western government? Look at the rationale of their whole objective, compare it to the aims of the French Resistance and you have chalk and cheese - they looked to rid themselves of a Nazi run nation with a nutcase of a leader who was systematically exterminating human beings!
This forum was NOT to do with "we are as guilty as them when it comes to being terrorists"! It is to do with our thoughts on the bombs set off in London.....an atrocity!"
No matter what is said in this forum, unless you are totally oblivious to the high value of human life, there is no excuse in any book that provides for the snuffing out AT RANDOM and without regard that which was treasured by so many - the lives of those killed by the bombs in London. We will do well to remember their grief (and indeed the grief for all those who loose loved ones) for a long time to come - without prejudice!
neep_docker
11-Jul-05, 19:56
Terrorists have taken their fight to the doorsteps of OUR land
Ah, now here we see the xenophobic discrimination start to finally appear from all of you who exhibit enforced grief and sentimentality.
What the heck is "our land" ?
Killing innocent people is wrong anywhere on this planet.
But because it happens on a piece of land that is politically arbitarily bounded, then suddenly we should pay attention.
If we didn't have such boundaries, then we wouldn't have half these problems. And what makes you think the masterminds of this aren't citizens of "our land" anyway?
Whether it's a massacre in Burma, or a murder in England, we should all be asking 'why' and seeking accountability, instead of outpouring sentimental tosh such as 'my thoughts are with the families'.
...were the French resistance fighters in the war terrorists?
Again, you're missing the point! Terrorists have taken their fight to the doorsteps of OUR land, not France, not Israel etc. but here on the doorstep of the UK.
No, you missed the point, I was talking about Palestinians in Palestine and the reasons why Israel armed itself.
But seeing as you mention it what is the difference between someone blown up in the UK and someone blown up in Israel, France, Afghanistan or Iraq? What is the difference between someone blown up with a terrorist bomb and someone blown up with a helicopter gunship or cruise missile? Don't they all bleed? Don't they all feel the agonising pain? Don't they all have mothers to cry for them? Isn't a life needlessly wasted a life needlessly wasted as where it happens? Why is it right for us to go to their countries and kill them but wrong for them to come here and kill us?
Let's put an end to all attrocities, those we commit against others as well as those others commit against us..
If the Islamic terrorists gave up terrorism, then everyone goes home alive, if the West stopped pursuing the terrorists then the terrorists would still keep coming.
If anyone has any illusions that the terrorists have a 'just cause' to retaliate to the War on Terror then they should remember this
here we see the xenophobic discrimination start to finally appear from all of you who exhibit enforced grief and sentimentality.
See you are wrong here neep-docker - again!!!!
I am the first to jump on bigots and people who discriminate but you are wrong. I have been moved to tears by the atrocities in the world, lets not forget todays anniversary shall we. Over the years i have watched evidence of mans inhumanity to man. Whether you like it or not it IS is differnt when it is close to home - not because we are any better or our lives more valuable than those of a palestinian or an iraqui but the simple truth is that it is different becaise we can imagine ourselves in the shoes of the victims much easier when we remember walking the streets they walk, sitting on the same trains they were sitting on, drinking in the same pubs they were drinking in. Most of us have never been to burma, palestine, iraq we may find it difficult to put ourselves in their place but we know london - these people who died are living our lives watching the same tv as us, doing the same things as we do thats what brings it home more to us and thats how come we grieve for the families and thepeople who died and were wonded with just that little bit more realism than when the atrocity happens elsewhere because - it could have been us - much more realistically than when they happen in far away countries
If the Islamic terrorists gave up terrorism, then everyone goes home alive, if the West stopped pursuing the terrorists then the terrorists would still keep coming.
How about over a million Palestinian refugees?
Do they get to go home?
How about over a million Palestinian refugees?
Do they get to go home?
How about the 6 million Jews that Hitler and his sidekicks killed, when do they get to go home?
How about over a million Palestinian refugees?
Do they get to go home?
How about the 6 million Jews that Hitler and his sidekicks killed, when do they get to go home?
Hitler was a European and a Catholic, I don't think we can blame the Muslims for that one.
http://www.palestinecenter.org/palestine/britishmandate.html
Catch up with your history Fred ok this is only Modern history......but I am sure the Jews had settled in that area a long time before even before Allah was ever born so I say thay have as much right to be there as the Palestinians have
http://www.palestinecenter.org/palestine/britishmandate.html
Catch up with your history Fred ok this is only Modern history......but I am sure the Jews had settled in that area a long time before even before Allah was ever born so I say thay have as much right to be there as the Palestinians have
By your logic the people of Rome have a right to declare most of Britain a Roman state.
Do you think the ethnic population of Birmingham have the right to declare the Midlands an indipendant state then go out to all the surrounding towns killing the native population so that the ones who arn't dead flee in terror of their lives and most of England is theirs?
I don't condone the use of bombs by Islamic extremists but as long as the west continues to deny the attrocities committed against them, tries to excuse the inexcusable and justify the unjustifiable then at least I understand it. I mean there's not much chance of negotiation with people who just see what they want to see and disregard the rest.
If the Islamic terrorists gave up terrorism, then everyone goes home alive, if the West stopped pursuing the terrorists then the terrorists would still keep coming.
How about over a million Palestinian refugees?
Do they get to go home?
Yes they do, Sharon is bulldozing Jewish homes to free up land for Palestinians. But an escalation in terrorism by Islamic groups may compromise that.
neep_docker
12-Jul-05, 11:15
Yes they do, Sharon is bulldozing Jewish homes to free up land for Palestinians. But an escalation in terrorism by Islamic groups may compromise that.
Do you occupy the same planet as the rest of us, Rheghead ? Your inane one-liners demonstrate a terrible ignorance of the subjects upon which you comment.
Anyway, I thought you said you were off ?
I actually agree with Fred on the Israel situation. Whilst it is true that there were (and are, although now very depleted) Jewish populations throughout the middle east, this does not give them the right to create the Zionist state of Israel. Zionism is wrong; there can be no arguments on that score.
Is it not true that Jewish homes are being bulldozed by the Jewish authorities? Or have I misread the news?
If the Islamic terrorists gave up terrorism, then everyone goes home alive, if the West stopped pursuing the terrorists then the terrorists would still keep coming.
How about over a million Palestinian refugees?
Do they get to go home?
Yes they do, Sharon is bulldozing Jewish homes to free up land for Palestinians. But an escalation in terrorism by Islamic groups may compromise that.
So you are saying that over a million Palestinian refugees are all going to be given their homes, the land their forefathers worked for centuries back because the Israelies are bulldozing a few houses now and are going to stop and blame it on terrorists soon.
Jews and Arabs lived alongside eachother without major incident before the WW2. You cannot blame the Jews to create the state of Israel, the land is theirs by way of scripture. They could not go back to their homes in eastern Europe or Germany etc, because the anti semitic communists had taken over half of Europe and Germany's infrastructure was still run by renounced Nazis. No way back. What was the solution? So far Fred you have not addressed this issue.
Sharron has made a start to compromise, it is a pity that Hamas and Islamic Jihad has not returned the gesture.
Yes they do, Sharon is bulldozing Jewish homes to free up land for Palestinians. But an escalation in terrorism by Islamic groups may compromise that.
Do you occupy the same planet as the rest of us, Rheghead ? Your inane one-liners demonstrate a terrible ignorance of the subjects upon which you comment.
Anyway, I thought you said you were off ?
Stubborn lumps are hard to flush that easy, try harder. I thought you wanted constructive comments?, so far you have failed to impress. It seems I am not the only one that holds that view of your posts. It is ironic that I was the only one that actually agreed with you on your views that Britain may have actually exacerbated terrorism but you have chosen to single me out for insults. My only problem with you was that you decided to vent your anti-English agenda in a thread that had no relevence, I have been quite consistent on this issue, so far you have not explained why you decided to do this?
Don't forget, Tony Blair is a Scot, you may have to rethink your anti-english sentiments if you hadn't realised this.
Anti-Semitic, now seems to indicate anti-Jewish when in fact the Semitic people includes both Arabs and Jews.
Isn’t it strange that the biggest influx of people into the state of Israel today is not Semitic at all but Caucasian from the former USSR?
It also irks me more than a little the proposed two nation peace proposal for the region……why? It seems that dialogue, inclusion and living together in harmony are the way forward for Northern Ireland, but Israel no chance they ain’t giving an inch.
[quote="fred
I don't condone the use of bombs by Islamic extremists but as long as the west continues to deny the attrocities committed against them, tries to excuse the inexcusable and justify the unjustifiable then at least I understand it. I mean there's not much chance of negotiation with people who just see what they want to see and disregard the rest.[/quote]
Fred you don't condone the use of bombs by Islamic extremists, BUT I dont see you comdeming it.
This whole tread was started because of the diabolical bombing in London last week, since then you have spat out nothing but anti Jewish,anti Semitic & anti Blair & Bush reteric. I have yet to see you condem the Talliban in Afghansitan, Saddam Husein for his invasion of Kuwait, or Hammas and Yasser Arafat for the suicide bombers or any other "Jihad"
weeboyagee
12-Jul-05, 14:28
Ah, ...discrimination starts to finally appear from all of you who exhibit enforced grief and sentimentality.
Not enforced, grief and sentimentality - that is of my own choice,...probably of the own choice of the others who are of similar thought in this debate also.
What the heck is "our land" ?
Precisely that "OUR LAND"! Belonging to us! We may all be Jock Thamsans bairns and all living on the planet mother earth, but like it or lump it, it is made up of countries with races, creeds etc making up the colourful tapestry of mankind. How come you couldn't see that I was saying each land - France, Israel etc all have their own problems (OK, making up the unilateral "OUR" problem) and we have it too? Terrorism. It was crystal clear in the post!
...unless you are totally oblivious to the high value of human life, there is no excuse in any book that provides for the snuffing out AT RANDOM and without regard ...
Killing innocent people is wrong anywhere on this planet.
We are in agreement, no?
But because it happens on a piece of land that is politically arbitarily bounded, then suddenly we should pay attention
Your conclusion, not my submission. We DO look for accountability but offer support (I believe that neep_docker, you call it, eh,...ah yes,...sentimental tosh) to the families, friends and others who knew the victims.
But seeing as you mention it what is the difference between someone blown up in the UK and someone blown up in Israel, France, Afghanistan or Iraq?
None. Reference my quote above! You DID miss that point, obviously.
Why is it right for us to go to their countries and kill them but wrong for them to come here and kill us?
We didn't go to KILL them, we went to remove a terrorist who was killing THEM as well as US! Hitler killed his own, Saddam killed his own!
Let's put an end to all attrocities, those we commit against others as well as those others commit against us..
With you on that one!
I actually agree with Fred on the Israel situation....true that there were ...Jewish populations throughout the middle east...no right to create the Zionist state of Israel
Oh dear,.. giving ear to this one Scotsboy, tend to think that Israel has to be careful with what it's doing too however, can't accept that the terrorists can justify bombing London as "revenge" for the consideration of the west being Zionist supporters.
No matter what, I repeat (yawn...) terrorism should be condemned by everyone who has a regard for the value of human life. Loss of life is regretable in any circumstance but in the manner it is lost through terrorism it is particularly evil, abhorent and we should all be condeming it and supporting those affected by it - its not sentimental tosh - its a feeling that comes from the soul and those who can't relate with it are in denial. No doubt that will cause a reaction........
Oh dear,.. giving ear to this one Scotsboy, tend to think that Israel has to be careful with what it's doing too however, can't accept that the terrorists can justify bombing London as "revenge" for the consideration of the west being Zionist supporters.
In no way was I saying that this was any justification, reason or cause of the bomb - simply agreeing that Zionism is wrong.
There is no cause that can justify the planting of bombs designed to kill and maim innocent civilains.
The "people" (sic) who planted those bombs are scum of the highest order and I would gladly permit them to receive Islamic justice, rather than the succor they will receive in a UK jail. Thankfully however "their virgin brides will not await them" inside.
weeboyagee
12-Jul-05, 15:58
Sorry scotsboy, wasn't meaning to put any angle on your thread in the manner you may have thought. Didn't think you would be thinking anything other than the above post. I was simply agreeing in principal with your caution over Isreal's current actions and tie-ing it in with the fact that any excuse such as Isreal's actions being used as an excuse by terrorists to justify (ahem, cough...) their actions is completely and utterly wrong.
I don't condone the use of bombs by Islamic extremists but as long as the west continues to deny the attrocities committed against them, tries to excuse the inexcusable and justify the unjustifiable then at least I understand it. I mean there's not much chance of negotiation with people who just see what they want to see and disregard the rest.
Fred you don't condone the use of bombs by Islamic extremists, BUT I dont see you comdeming it.
This whole tread was started because of the diabolical bombing in London last week, since then you have spat out nothing but anti Jewish,anti Semitic & anti Blair & Bush reteric. I have yet to see you condem the Talliban in Afghansitan, Saddam Husein for his invasion of Kuwait, or Hammas and Yasser Arafat for the suicide bombers or any other "Jihad"
I'm not anti Jewish, I have made no anti Jewish statements, I have made no anti Semitic statements, I am anti Zionist and proud of it.
If people want to see an end to attrocities like the London bombings then there must also be an end to the attrocities committed against the Arab world by the west, like invading their countries to steal their oil.
If people want to see an end to attrocities like the London bombings then the nation which has declared itself policeman of the world must develop a sense of justice and ensure that Israel abides by international law, that they abide by UN resolutions and that they abide by the Geneva Convention instead of backing and financing their crimes against the Palestinians.
But that won't happen, it won't happen now for the exact same reason it didn't happen in 1948.
"I am sorry gentlemen, but I have to answer to hundreds of thousands who are anxious for the success of Zionism. I do not have hundreds of thousands of Arabs among my constituents."
President Harry Truman.
wavy davy
12-Jul-05, 20:44
Weeboyagee,
Re your assertion;
"We didn't go to KILL them, we went to remove a terrorist who was killing THEM as well as US! Hitler killed his own, Saddam killed his own!"
The reason our leaders gave for going was because Iraq possessed WMD, not regime change or "the war on terror". They lied.
Re terrorism, the US congressional enquiry into the intelligence supporting the war concluded that there were no identifiable links between Al Quaeda and Iraq. Further, they found no evidence that Iraq sponsored or carried out terrorism (outside of Iraq that is)
Re killing his own, I hate to trivialise killing, but I wouldn't mind betting that we've managed to kill more Iraqis than Saddam ever did.
If our leaders really wanted to have a go at a tyrant knocking off his own people and posing a threat to world peace they need look no further than North Korea. If they wanted to attack terrorism, Syria and Iran spring to mind.
Going back to the London bombings, no matter what some self styled experts on this thread assert, they will prove to have been provoked by US and British policy in Palestine and Iraq.
And before someone jumps on me, I have every sympathy with the victims of terrorism, but we might do well to remember the Stern gang and Dresden as a couple of other examples of that particular brand of "warfare"
Wavy-Davy, have you read Al-Qeda The True Story of Radical Islam by Jason Burke? Just a question.
wavy davy
12-Jul-05, 22:59
Scotsboy,
Yes I have read it and very good it is too. You have to admire his willingness to get his hands dirty, unlike many reporters.
As I recall, he supports your theory - I can't remember how you very succintly put it, but in essence radical Islam has it's roots way before Palestine, Iraq and more contemporary events.
I certainly wouldn't argue with that , but iBritish and US ipolicy/actions n the Middle East just prove to younger radicals that the threat to Islam is ongoing. I believe that in the context of the London bombings, these more contemporary events will prove to have been the kickerthat drove them to do what they did.
Just to make myself clear, I hold no brief for terrorism, regardless of the perpetrator.If there's anything that literally brings me to tears, it's what we are prepared to do to each other in the name of creed and dogma.
All I'm trying to say is that our leaders, by their actions, have decidely not made our world a safer place to live in. If it was stupidity I could sort of come to terms with it, but neither Blair nor Bush are stupid men and I have to assume that their motives are base and founded on the "energy imperative".
neep_docker
12-Jul-05, 23:09
So it turns out the London bombers were all from Yorkshire.
Can we now expect a coalition 'shock and awe' bombing raid on Leeds then ?
Will there be a national boycott of black puddings ?
weeboyagee
12-Jul-05, 23:28
If people want to see an end to attrocities like the London bombings then the nation which has declared itself policeman of the world must develop a sense of justice and ensure that Israel abides by international law, that they abide by UN resolutions and that they abide by the Geneva Convention instead of backing and financing their crimes against the Palestinians.
...and that will end the bombings and stop the terrorists? I think not.
This tit-for-tat game of we do this and they will do that does not equate in the minds of people such as the terrorists that caused the London bombings. They are fanatical about what they do and what they believe in. Their vision is focused and does not consider the balancing of world politics in the manner you suggest. They believe they are right and that everyone else who does not believe the same is not just wrong but are regarded as the enemy of their faith...and how do they attack it?... reference London!
Wavydavy, OK there were no WMD, world opinion changed when this became more transparent, but the fact remains, there is a fundamental difference between the nations who do not control the masses by killing them to teach them a lesson and those who do. Nevertheless, terrorist activity is terrorist activity, whether it is perpetrated on your own doorstep or on someone elses.
My last thoughts for the night.....
unless you are totally oblivious to the high value of human life, there is no excuse in any book that provides for the snuffing out AT RANDOM and without regard ...the lives of those killed by the bombs in London
Killing innocent people is wrong anywhere on this planet
There is no cause that can justify the planting of bombs designed to kill and maim innocent civilains
I don't condone the use of bombs by Islamic extremists
I personally am shocked, stunned. and horrified at deliberate acts of terrorism anywhere in the world
bigjjuk, Rheghead and squidge all say the same or similar - it seems to me we are all agreed - terrorists are not excused, no matter the policies or politics!
weeboyagee
12-Jul-05, 23:36
Do you occupy the same planet as the rest of us, Rheghead ? Your inane one-liners demonstrate a terrible ignorance of the subjects upon which you comment.
Will there be a national boycott of black puddings ?
one liners?....ahem, cough,.....yawn..... :confused
If people want to see an end to attrocities like the London bombings then the nation which has declared itself policeman of the world must develop a sense of justice and ensure that Israel abides by international law, that they abide by UN resolutions and that they abide by the Geneva Convention instead of backing and financing their crimes against the Palestinians.
...and that will end the bombings and stop the terrorists? I think not.
But how do we convince someone it is wrong to kill while we kill them and support others that kill them? How do we convince someone it's wrong to use bombs when the bombs we use against them are so much more powerful and sophisticated than theirs? How do we call the bombers cowards when the richest and most powerful countries of the world join their military forces against the poorest?
Fanatics don't just happen you know, people become fanatical for reasons. Protestant and Catholic live side by side in peace in the rest of the world and in Belfast they blow each other up, that didn't just happen by chance you know, there were reasons. Episodes like Bloody Sunday did not deter the IRA, we did far far more for their recruitment campaign on that one day than they ever did for themselves. It didn't make them any less fanatical it made them ten times as fanatical.
Part of the deal for peace in Northern Ireland was for the British Government to publicly
admit we were wrong, that the evil IRA didn't just decide one day to start blowing up innocent people, the British goverment had done more than its share of the killing of innocents itself. Couldn't we just do that at the start of this one and save a lot of mothers children losing their lives in between? There are over 5 billion Muslims in this world and we can't kill them all as how hard we try.
It is terribly sad to think that these delusional young men - one of whom had a young baby were used as pawns by some incredibly evil people to the extent that they acted as they did.
There was an interesting article in the sunday times which suggested that the mosques and community centres are no longer where the recruiting of these young people takes place but in the pubs and clubs. These cruel callous evil people identify young men who are disaffected, unemployed or otherwise socially excluded and use that to further their own ends. In addition they focus on universities to identify "angry young men" who can be swayed and influenced to a similar extent.
A former islamic extremist who fought in algeria and became close to Bin Laden befroe becoming disillusioned said
Like many muslims i am angered by what the americans are doing in Iraq or the Israelis do in Palestine. But injustice must be dealt with by scholars and politicians not by hotheads. These recruiters and terrorists are simply trying to use the anger of the young for their own agenda. Of course there is anger but these criminals are trying to pervert it
WE need to maybe look closer to home for the solution as to how to reduce the liklihood of young islamic men being involved in this sort of activity, Tackling social exclusion, racism and unemployment amongst the young asian communities, dealing with some of the deprived areas in which they live to improve and change their lifestyle. Tackling underachivement in schools and encouraging the voice of muslim women to be heard are some of the ways in which we can reduce th social exclusion that leads to anger and allows these evil people to sow their seeds of death and destruction
I remember about this time last year when the so called leader of Al Qeda in Saudi Arabia was killed in a shoot out, this guy had run a hellish campaign. I heard that a photo of him was published in the Arab News, I bought a copy to see this monster and felt numb when I looked at the body of a young guy riddled with bullets, he looked like a normal guy, completely the opposite to what I was expecting. I then thought what on Earth could have twisted this guy so much that he did all the evil he did, who had manipulated and twisted him so much to make him into the monster that he was? Unfortunately those who did this are still around, grooming more young victims, who will meet their virgin brides in heaven. [evil]
neep___docker
13-Jul-05, 14:22
grooming more young victims, who will meet their virgin brides in heaven.
And how do you know that isn't exactly what happens to them in heaven ?
It's no more fanciful than most of the Christian claptrap that gets trotted out at your local happy-clappy church.
grooming more young victims, who will meet their virgin brides in heaven.
And how do you know that isn't exactly what happens to them in heaven ?
It's no more fanciful than most of the Christian claptrap that gets trotted out at your local happy-clappy church.
By your logic, you have not considered the possibility that the news reporters and a vast street theatrical production company that consists of millions of actors are just acting out an elaborate tragedy without our knowledge ... :roll:
a slim possibility if you are subject to some kind of 'Truman Show Hoax' no?
SemourLemmings
13-Jul-05, 17:44
To those posting reguarding the "Poor Palestines" remember back about 30 years...Seems too many people are forgetting Black September. Too many people are forgetting if you go back further, when the Palestines were told initially they'd be part of Israel, the Palestines going into homes in the middle of the night slashing Jewish people's throats. Seems too many people are forgetting even further back the meetings between the Mufasi and Hitler...
I'm so very sorry London has had to experience this kind of calamity at the hands of terrorists.
To those posting reguarding the "Poor Palestines" remember back about 30 years...Seems too many people are forgetting Black September. Too many people are forgetting if you go back further, when the Palestines were told initially they'd be part of Israel, the Palestines going into homes in the middle of the night slashing Jewish people's throats. Seems too many people are forgetting even further back the meetings between the Mufasi and Hitler...
When the Palestines were told they'd be part of Israel?
You wouldn't by any chance be American would you?
weeboyagee
14-Jul-05, 10:06
Palestinians, Isrealis, Arabs, Muslims, Iraqis and their societies are NOT the problem here. It is terrorists, pure and simple. A minority amount of brain-washed individuals who seek to destroy human life. How much more it is brought home to us that they have been succoured in the midst of our own community here in the UK. Previous posts have referred to attrocities in history undertaken regardless of political motiviation (socialist, totalitarian, capatalist etc) but these are pockets of individuals created within communities with one aim - to terrorise, kill and maim primarily in the name of their religion. It is that primary reason they say gives them an excuse to execute others in a land they believe attacks their religion but not all who believe in their religion believe their murdering acts are justified by it. So they can ditch that excuse anytime they like.
I already said previously how sensational it would all become when they "get them", about the only point where neep_docker and I agree, but that should still not diminish our regret at the loss of life. Time may be a great healer and memories become more distant but the thought when it comes back of what those terrorists carried out in London (and for that matter any of the terrorist attacks in history) and the effect it has had on those left to mourn individuals now removed prematurely from society should make us think all the more on (as squidge was trying to say) "what if it was us or our loved ones"?
Something that has always struck me about atrocities like this is the lack of compassion shown to the families of the bombers. My heart goes out to them just as much as to the families of the killed and maimed. The politicians never mention them in the same braeth as they mention the innocent victims of the outrage.
These poor people have to live with the guilt their offspring have left behind.
I wonder how others feel about this.
Is their a natural revulsion kicks in at times like this that covers the whole family? I read a book recently about customs and taboos in prmitive societies. It suggests that the whole family is covered by the breaking of a taboo by one member of the family, but they are not necessary aware of why they do it.
I would be really interested to know your deepest and truthful feelings about the members of the bombers families. Do you find them covered by the same revulsion you have towards their offspring?
I already said previously how sensational it would all become when they "get them", about the only point where neep_docker and I agree, but that should still not diminish our regret at the loss of life. Time may be a great healer and memories become more distant but the thought when it comes back of what those terrorists carried out in London (and for that matter any of the terrorist attacks in history) and the effect it has had on those left to mourn individuals now removed prematurely from society should make us think all the more on (as squidge was trying to say) "what if it was us or our loved ones"?
Yet you don't think it's right to say "what if it was us or one of our loved ones shot by a British soldier in Iraq" or "what if it was one of us or our loved ones bombed by an American plane in Afghanistan"?
weeboyagee
14-Jul-05, 13:23
Yet you don't think it's right to say "what if it was us or one of our loved ones shot by a British soldier in Iraq" or "what if it was one of us or our loved ones bombed by an American plane in Afghanistan"?
Do I need to? For the record, yes, of course it is right to say what you've said. I repeat a similar thought from a previous post, British soldiers or American planes do not target the innocents on purpose. They do not go out to kill them as targets. Terrorists DO target the innocents. They know if they sit on a bus and blow up a bomb that they will kill ordinary commuters! There is a gulf of difference in your meaning when it comes to the direct purpose of their actions.
These poor people have to live with the guilt their offspring have left behind...I wonder how others feel about this....I would be really interested to know your deepest and truthful feelings about the members of the bombers families
Honestly,... if I were to find out that it was a close relative of mine I'd be gutted. But the heart in me (you know the sentimental tosh part) would make me feel very sorry for them. That's it from the ignorant uninformed view. I would really want to know more though,... did the families know? Did or did they not support what they did? At the end of the day they are not the guilty ones anyway. If indeed it was those who are believed to commit the attrocities that actually did do it, then the blood is on their hands and those who manipulated them or otherwise assisted them.
I would be really interested to know your deepest and truthful feelings about the members of the bombers families. Do you find them covered by the same revulsion you have towards their offspring?
i am saddened for them. Not only do they have to bear the grief of losing a husband, son, brother but they have to bear the guilt that their loved one could do such a thing, they have to bear the shame they will undoubtedly feel and they have to come to terms with the facts that they had no idea what their relative or friend was doing. Thats a huge burden to bear and a terrible ordeal for anyone to have to go through.
I cant help but wonder what took these seemingly ordinary young men, and turned them into these murderers. What allowed such evil to grow in thier lives and allowed death to be welcomed by them. How did the son of a guy who ran a chippy in leeds, who had lived here all his life turn into someone responsible for such an atrocity. What is happening in the UK that provides fertile ground for evil manipulative people to take our young adults and turn their heads so much that they think this is the right course of action. Baffled and sad is what i feel. And i beleive it is as much of a tredgedy for the families of these young men as it is for the families of the innocent victims
And how do you know that isn't exactly what happens to them in heaven ?
I was actually hoping they were in hell.
weeboyagee
14-Jul-05, 15:36
......I was actually hoping they were in hell
I'm sure that's where the terrorists think that we are all going! :roll:
There are over 5 billion Muslims in this world and we can't kill them all as how hard we try.
No, your figure is way off the mark Fred.
The population of the entire planet is approx 6.4 Billion and Christianity makes up the largest section of that with approx one third. Ball park figure for Muslims is around one fifth so you are out by well over 3.5 Billion. Maybe if we can master the arithmetic we can then aspire to putting the world's problems to right!!
Interestingly, over 1 billion people in this world are non-religious, which is bigger than Hinduism, yet you never hear much shouting about showing respect for anyone's decision to live life without a "faith"
There are over 5 billion Muslims in this world and we can't kill them all as how hard we try.
No, your figure is way off the mark Fred.
The population of the entire planet is approx 6.4 Billion and Christianity makes up the largest section of that with approx one third. Ball park figure for Muslims is around one fifth so you are out by well over 3.5 Billion. Maybe if we can master the arithmetic we can then aspire to putting the world's problems to right!!
Yes the figure is wrong I should have checked I was probably in a hurry.
It doesn't make any difference to the point I was making though, we made exactly the same noises about the IRA and pitched the might of the British army against them and everybody ended up losing. Even with the luxury of being able to wipe out an entire village to get one man they will still recruit faster than we can kill them because the faster we kill them the faster they will recruit.
We are heading for Belfast on a global scale as what the numbers are and every time one of our leaders goes on TV preaching war not peace we are one step closer. In Ireland it wasn't long before the Unionists set up paramilitary organisations in imitation of the IRA and if the extremists of Britain start doing the same, firebombing Mosques and executing Muslims in Leeds and Manchester then all hell is going to be let loose and let loose right on our doorstep.
WE have to keep a check on what is going on here. There is not an islam against the rest of the UK thing going on in the UK. There is not a Uk against islam thing going on and this can never be allowed to be the case. These terrorists were exactly that - terrorists who used impressionable people to carry out their evil work. I would actually be surprised if it really has anything to do with religion as it stands. I think religion is a tool used to increase the power and prestige of those who use it.
People from all walks of life, all religions, all backgrounds perished in the London Bombings. It was done to target civillians not "christians" or "muslims" and its worth remembering that.
weeboyagee
15-Jul-05, 14:01
I agree with squidge. We are getting away from the point all the time. Who cares the religion of the bombers? They were murderers and that's it. They killed innocent civillians. Their reasons were not just - no matter what.
The amount of Muslims, Hindus or Christians in the world matters little when it comes to the killing and maiming of innocent people. We've already heard on this thread how we shouldn't be making such a drama out of the fact that these people died moreover that we should be looking for accountability, but the fact remains, they died innocent.
How can people believe in a faith that is seen by the world to promote the execution of innocents and have it blessed by their god? They can't - but then these terrorists are not true representatives of their faith are they? True Christians would say that a murderer who claims that his acts are blessed by his Almighty is not a true Christian. So lets ditch this nonsense that these terrorists had a faith other than their own belief that they were doing right - and that goes for those who groomed them as well - the world has no room for "faiths" such as theirs. It robbed people of their right to exist!
WE have to keep a check on what is going on here. There is not an islam against the rest of the UK thing going on in the UK. There is not a Uk against islam thing going on and this can never be allowed to be the case. These terrorists were exactly that - terrorists who used impressionable people to carry out their evil work. I would actually be surprised if it really has anything to do with religion as it stands. I think religion is a tool used to increase the power and prestige of those who use it.
Keep a check on what is going on here like we did in Northern Ireland? Where it wasn't a Catholic versus Protestant thing?
Keep a check on what's going on like we did in Bradford, Burnley, Brixton, Tottenham or Toxteth?
There are a lot of angry young men out there, some with good reason and when the police interveve they'll get it from both sides. How would you suggest keeping a check on them, send in the army?
No fred i meant keep a check on our mouths - not let ourselves over react and spout ill informed and reactionary rubbish.
The situation in NI was different, The riots in the 80s were different and if you dont see that then you are daft.
I stand by what i said earlier - we need to look closely at what allows these evil people to find willing and open minds for such hatred. We will find that closer to home than in the Middle East. Im not saying that the situation there isnt an impact. I am appalled by many of the actions of Israel but it doesnt make me want to go out and bomb buses. What turns ordinary young men into murderers - and its not simply islam or EVERY muslim would be that way.
It may be just me but I am actually getting quite tired of being told that the wider muslim community in Britain condemns the violence. I fully well know that, I just don't feel as if I need to be told a zillion times by everyone and his dog. But I do feel as if the Muslim community has to take some responsibility for how hate is being peddled under the umbrella of Islamic teaching eg Abu Hamza.
I agree with squidge and weeboyaqgee. They've said everything I want to - only they got there first!
It may be just me but I am actually getting quite tired of being told that the wider muslim community in Britain condemns the violence. I fully well know that, I just don't feel as if I need to be told a zillion times by everyone and his dog. But I do feel as if the Muslim community has to take some responsibility for how hate is being peddled under the umbrella of Islamic teaching eg Abu Hamza.
I don't understand this point of view. The actions of Abu Hamza lie with Abu Hamza, not with Islam or Muslims.
If a Christian fundamentalist bombed a hospital because it offered abortion services, would you hold the 'Christian community' responsible? Would you demand the congregation of Thurso West Church or Thrumster Church or Reay Church take responsibility for a bomber who acted singularly and without the support of that 'community'?
If the IRA began bombing the British mainland again, would you demand that all Catholics take responsibility?
The London bombers were criminals and murderers. They weren't acting with the support of most Muslims. Why should innocent Muslims take any responsibility for the actions of 4 murderers (or any others who were involved)?
I am led to believe that there are some Muslim clerics who are very radical. They go on a circuit of Mosques preaching very anti Western propaganda, even bordering on incitement in the name of Jihad. The Muslim community should take action on these nutters, by stopping them preaching their hate. If the Reay church was hiring guest speakers to incite violence against abortion clinics then yes I would object. Simple no?
They weren't acting with the support of most Muslims.
Yawn...
I am led to believe that there are some Muslim clerics who are very radical. They go on a circuit of Mosques preaching very anti Western propaganda, even bordering on incitement in the name of Jihad. The Muslim community should take action on these nutters, by stopping them preaching their hate. Simple no?
No. I'm not a Catholic, but if I were, I wouldn't have the power to stop the IRA. I'm not a Christian, but if I were, I wouldn't have the power to stop Christian fundamentalist bombers.
Why do you think that Muslims are a single, homogenous group?
They weren't acting with the support of most Muslims.
Yawn...
You may find it tiresome, but the reason it needs to be said is because the message clearly isn't sinking in. The vast majority of Muslims had nothing to do with the bombings and do not support it in any way, shape or form.
Yet people like you crop up to demand that Muslims take responsibility for the actions of a few. No wonder Muslims keep having to say the same thing. If you'd only understand what they're saying, maybe they wouldn't feel the need to keep saying it.
The IRA thing was very different. Yes it was Catholic v Protestant but the fight was not about the difference in faith. The IRA took up arms because they felt that catholics were treated as second class citizens, so they were put at an economic disadvantage.
Muslim teachings hold the view that an attack on a muslim is attack on all muslims. Catholics don't preach that to such an extent. This is where I think the Muslim community in the UK should take responsibility by not allowing such terrible hatred to be preached in mosques. They should tailor there beliefs to be compatible with life in a western country.
A wise man ( My Father) told me many years ago when I was a boy, that one word in the English language has caused more death and war on this planet of ours since time began...and that word is "RELIGION" and I can now see how right and very wise he was.
I am glad I decided to become an Agnostic.
Yet people like you crop up to demand that Muslims take responsibility for the actions of a few. No wonder Muslims keep having to say the same thing. If you'd only understand what they're saying, maybe they wouldn't feel the need to keep saying it.
I wasn't demanding that the Muslim community should take responsibility for the bombings, I was demanding they take responsibility for how Islam is taught in their mosques. It is irresponsible of the wider muslim community to allow anti western speakers to teach in mosques.
There is plenty of written evidence in the Koran and the Bible to have them stopped from being printed under the new incitement against religious hatred laws, rather ironic eh?
Anybody who says that there isn't a link between anti western rhetoric and attacks on western establishments by muslim extremists is living on cloud cuckoo land.
It is one thing being a muslim and another that takes in the littaral meaning of the words of the Koran. Ill be honest I will admit my lack of knowledge of Islam, but could anyone explain to me these following verses out of the Koran?
Fight against those who believe not in Allah, nor in the Last Day, no forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger [Muhammad] and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (Islam) among the people of the Scripture [Jews and Christians] until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. (Surat At-Taubah 9:29)
O you who believe [Muslims]! Fight those of the infidels who are close to you, and let them find harshness in you; and know that Allah is with those who are pious. (Surat Al-Taubah 9:123)
And fight until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah) and (all and every kind of) worship is for Allah (alone).
(Surat Al-Bagarah 2:193)
Surely the Muslim community should accept enough responsibility to take action on those clerics who teach this hatred?
Crikey Rheghead - surely you know better - we are gonan have a list of bible verses now which pretty much say the same thing... You can use holy writings to support pretty much everything. The word "fight" is ambiguous enough as it is
"fight" with swords and axes bombs and guns
or "fight" with strong words and faith
you surely dont need it pointing out that these verses are open to interpretation.
In actual fact mosques appear to be working hard to remove the radicals from preaching hatred in their mosques and - as was pointed out in a number of articles over the last week, much of the "extremisit" activity is now taking place in clubs and bars and other meeting places. Islam is not a violent and intolerent releigion in fact the koran also says that people should live together in harmony
{O mankind! We created you from (a pair of) a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that ye may know each other (not that ye may despise each other). Verily the most noble of you in the sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you
Crikey Rheghead - surely you know better - we are gonan have a list of bible verses now which pretty much say the same thing... You can use holy writings to support pretty much everything. The word "fight" is ambiguous enough as it is
"fight" with swords and axes bombs and guns
or "fight" with strong words and faith
you surely dont need it pointing out that these verses are open to interpretation.
In actual fact mosques appear to be working hard to remove the radicals from preaching hatred in their mosques and - as was pointed out in a number of articles over the last week, much of the "extremisit" activity is now taking place in clubs and bars and other meeting places. Islam is not a violent and intolerent releigion in fact the koran also says that people should live together in harmony
{O mankind! We created you from (a pair of) a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that ye may know each other (not that ye may despise each other). Verily the most noble of you in the sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you
I quite agree with you squidge, scripture can be taken any which way that you want it. But fighting with faith and words if taken in the terrorists way will lead only to death.
But I will eat my hat when I hear a muslim cleric say something on these lines...
Our christian brothers have liberated our muslims in Iraq
No fred i meant keep a check on our mouths - not let ourselves over react and spout ill informed and reactionary rubbish.
Just write it off as ill informed reactionary rubbish and who knows, it might never happen.
The situation in NI was different, The riots in the 80s were different and if you dont see that then you are daft.
I probably am daft but the riot in Bradford was in 2001, 7th of July 2001 just four years before the London bombings, four years to the day.
But there's probably no connection whatsoever between what caused the race riots and what caused the London bombings so it really doesn't matter at all and of course there is no similarity at all between an Irish terrorist and an Islamic terrorist so any lessons we learnt in Ireland we might as well just forget.
I stand by what i said earlier - we need to look closely at what allows these evil people to find willing and open minds for such hatred. We will find that closer to home than in the Middle East. Im not saying that the situation there isnt an impact. I am appalled by many of the actions of Israel but it doesnt make me want to go out and bomb buses. What turns ordinary young men into murderers - and its not simply islam or EVERY muslim would be that way.
Well I guess you would have to have grown up on the streets of Leeds to have some understanding of what allowed this particular atrocity to happen.
Or at least be prepared to listen to someone who did.
wavy davy
16-Jul-05, 00:34
Scotsboy,
Earlier in this debate you asserted that "If you think these bombings have anything to do with Iraq, you are wrong."
Given the statements from family and friends of several of the bombers, and I paraphrase here, "he was very upset by the actions of the US/UK in Iraq and the West Bank", would you care to reconsider your assertion.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It msytifies me why some people on this board are mystified by the motives of the bombers.
Our leaders shrug away the tens of thousands of people who have died in Iraq as a result of an invasion based on Bush and Blair's lies . That they lied is an indisputabale fact and I'll trot out chapter and verse how they lied if anyone wants to debate that.
Iraq was the icing on the cake for a number of Muslims, following Palestine and Afghanistan
Given the nature of Islam (or in other circumstances any other organised religion) it shouldn't be surprising that if you hack off a large number of people by your actions, a small number of those will be hacked off enough to strike back. In the absence of a mega billion dollar military resource they may well use 10 lbs of explosive.
We scratch our heads about identifying the reasons why young Muslims become disaffected enough to become terrorists. It isn't simple, but a good start would be to stop killing Muslims for cheap oil and the Jewish vote in the US .
Given the statements from family and friends of several of the bombers, and I paraphrase here, "he was very upset by the actions of the US/UK in Iraq and the West Bank", would you care to reconsider your assertion.
No
Given the statements from family and friends of several of the bombers, and I paraphrase here, "he was very upset by the actions of the US/UK in Iraq and the West Bank", would you care to reconsider your assertion.
No
I suppose you think that the unjust and inhumane treatment of Muslims at Guantanomo Bay had nothing to do with it either.
Correct - next question.
Ask yourself this Fred,Wavy et al.........you yourselves are upset about these events, other muslims are upset about these events - why are they not blowing themselves up? Your highlighting of these events as causes are as simplistic as those pointing at the muslim community as a whole as the source of the problem.
Iraq was the icing on the cake for a number of Muslims, following Palestine and Afghanistan .
I think the twin towers was the icing on the cake for the west, or do you suggest we should have sat back and allow the atrocities to be levelled against us probably at an escalting rate if Bin laden hadn't been removed? Terrorism did not start after Iraq, palestine and afganastan. Okay they did not improve anything, and there is plenty wrong with US policies which are supported by Britain. there is a lot wrong with the world, but I can't imagin the brain washing that goes into convincing a young man, brought up in Britain, with a wife and child on the way, that blowing himself up and killing innocent people is a ticket into paradise.
Funny how the instigators, bin laden and his followers etc. never sacrifice themselves in the same way. When will these extremists realise they are simply pawns and that their lives and souls mean nothing to the powers behind them?
Actually just been browsing todays "local" paper - I am sure those trying to justify the acts or at least the understanding may be interested to see how a Saudi journalist and a Saudi paper is reporting on the Londojn bombings.........but then again maybe not :roll:
http://www.arabnews.com/?page=7§ion=0&article=67035&d=16&m=7&y=2005
Actually just been browsing todays "local" paper - I am sure those trying to justify the acts or at least the understanding may be interested to see how a Saudi journalist and a Saudi paper is reporting on the Londojn bombings.........but then again maybe not :roll:
http://www.arabnews.com/?page=7§ion=0&article=67035&d=16&m=7&y=2005
I'm sure that the Arab people and press in Britain are working hard to avoid a rivers of blood situation.
It's just a pity that the British people arn't doing the same.
Take a look at this news story:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4685703.stm
Then read this to see what it means to an Arab:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,939608,00.html
Did you bother to read the piece I posted Fred? :roll:
The IRA thing was very different. Yes it was Catholic v Protestant but the fight was not about the difference in faith. The IRA took up arms because they felt that catholics were treated as second class citizens, so they were put at an economic disadvantage.
Muslim teachings hold the view that an attack on a muslim is attack on all muslims. Catholics don't preach that to such an extent. This is where I think the Muslim community in the UK should take responsibility by not allowing such terrible hatred to be preached in mosques. They should tailor there beliefs to be compatible with life in a western country.
Possibly a first, but I find myself agreeing with Rheghead on this.
I also feel that the Muslim intollerance of other religions (while appreciating that most religions fundamentally do not allow for other beliefs) does not take into account that it is only our modern Christian values that prevent the western world from wading in and taking their countries from them.
(please don't all rush to mention Iraq - I can't say that Mr Blair has my support on that one)
Iraq was the icing on the cake for a number of Muslims, following Palestine and Afghanistan .
I think the twin towers was the icing on the cake for the west, or do you suggest we should have sat back and allow the atrocities to be levelled against us probably at an escalting rate if Bin laden hadn't been removed? Terrorism did not start after Iraq, palestine and afganastan. Okay they did not improve anything, and there is plenty wrong with US policies which are supported by Britain. there is a lot wrong with the world, but I can't imagin the brain washing that goes into convincing a young man, brought up in Britain, with a wife and child on the way, that blowing himself up and killing innocent people is a ticket into paradise.
Funny how the instigators, bin laden and his followers etc. never sacrifice themselves in the same way. When will these extremists realise they are simply pawns and that their lives and souls mean nothing to the powers behind them?
Well - he's a leader (just like Blair - who also isn't on the front line)
You will never stop the suicide-bomber, intent on reaching a better place........................ All you can do is help them on their way.
wavy davy
16-Jul-05, 12:50
I don't disagree that Islamic terrorism, if we can cal it that, had it's origins long before Palestine, Afghanistan and Iraq. I wouldn't even argue that the "brainwashers" give a poke about what happens in these places. Their aim is much wider and longer term - to overthrow the corrupt West and replace it with a pan Islamic regime.
All I am saying is that there is a feeling among many Muslims that the West pursues unjust policies in the Middle East. The brainwashers leverage that perception and use it to brainwash a small number of young disaffected Muslims to commit these dreadful atrocities. Until Blair and Bush adopt a more balanced approach in the Middle East, like stopping invading Islamic counties on false premises, the "mad mullahs" will have a potent tool at their disposal.
My anger is directed towards Blair and Bush portraying the war in Iraq as a war against terrorism. It's nothing of the sort. If they had directed the resources they've expended in Iraq against the real causes and perpetrators of terrorism we would be living in a safer world. As it is, they've handed the brainwashers a propaganda tool on a plate.
Why aren't all Muslims blowing themselves and others up? Why didn't everyone in the Republic of Ireland who had a grudge against the Brits join the IRA. Because not many people, no matter how strongly they hold a view, will murder to support that view. But some will.
Fred, Wavy, you keep hammering on about the "Warmongers" Bush and Blair but if I recollect the United Nations issued Mandate 1441 for the invasion of Iraq to get rid of Saddam, for among other things his ethnic "cleansing" of fellow Muslims..i.e. Kurds, and his fellow Iraqis in the south.
So why not condem the UN and all the other countries who agreed with this mandate, some of whom were Muslim countries.
Did you bother to read the piece I posted Fred? :roll:
Yes, it was pretty much what I'd have expected from a Saudi newspaper.
Did you look at the article about Ryanair using a picture of the man who gassed more Kurds than Sadam Hussein to sell tickets?
How many muslims do you talk to on a daily basis that share your views Fred?
Fred, Wavy, you keep hammering on about the "Warmongers" Bush and Blair but if I recollect the United Nations issued Mandate 1441 for the invasion of Iraq to get rid of Saddam, for among other things his ethnic "cleansing" of fellow Muslims..i.e. Kurds, and his fellow Iraqis in the south.
So why not condem the UN and all the other countries who agreed with this mandate, some of whom were Muslim countries.
Your memory must be failing you, Mandate 1441 was not a mandate to invade Iraq, 1441 was a mandate for Iraq to destroy its weapons of mass destruction, there were no weapons of mass destruction and we went to war without a UN resolution. The fact that we went to war without a UN resolution did a great deal of damage to the credibility of the UN and to world peace.
I'm sure that with time America would have put enough preasure on other countries to get a resolution but the deal between Iraq and Russia for them to develop Iraqi oil fields was going through and America couldn't keep on causing a humanitarian crisis in Iraq with sanctions imposed over weapons of mass destruction which didn't exist indefinitely.
How many muslims do you talk to on a daily basis that share your views Fred?
I don't talk to anyone on a daily basis, not even my wife.
deal between Iraq and Russia for them to develop Iraqi oil fields
........and hence the mock outrage of France :roll:
Meanwhile, back to the THREAD. The war in Iraq is not the subject of the thread.
weeboyagee
16-Jul-05, 16:43
Crikey,...I need to stop going away on Friday nights - you guys go flying off with this thread and I take all of my Saturday catching up!
Fred, Wavy, you keep hammering on about the "Warmongers" Bush and Blair but...the United Nations issued Mandate 1441 for the invasion of Iraq to get rid of Saddam, for among other things his ethnic "cleansing" of fellow Muslims..i.e. Kurds, and his fellow Iraqis in the south.
We didn't go to KILL them, we went to remove a terrorist who was killing THEM as well as US! Hitler killed his own, Saddam killed his own!
Well fred, no points for guessing I'm with golach on this one. A muslim nation with a nutcase at the helm and we believe that we should have left them to it? Quotes from the Koran shown on this thread don't lead me to believe that the muslim nation of Iraq was following the principles held up to be its fundamental guidelines for day-to-day living - but as I said earlier...
So lets ditch this nonsense that these terrorists had a faith other than their own belief that they were doing right - and that goes for those who groomed them as well - the world has no room for "faiths" such as theirs
...Iraq was living by the warped personal faith of Saddam and not by any other "faith" or more correctly "religion"!
The war in Iraq is not the subject of the thread
You're right scotsboy. Following the thread in it's entirity how many are saying that the war in Iraq (waged by Bush and Blair as is stated) is wrongly being held up as the primary reason that is being used for the London Bombings! It is NOT! I've said it before, I'll say it again, terrorists were carrying out these attrocities long before Iraq, 9/11, London etc. There are countless examples throughout the years.
Did you look at the article about Ryanair using a picture of the man who gassed more Kurds than Sadam Hussein to sell tickets?
Aw c'mon fred, Michael O'Leary will stoop to any level to get a boost in Ryanair's profits. I've heard enough stories about that man and watched enough documentaries to do with his attitude and ignorance to Joe Public for me to realise that those who buy tickets for his airline are not necessarily influenced to do so by such advertising - the man is, in my opinion (apart from clever enough to know how to make a pound) warped in the head!
Their aim is much wider and longer term - to overthrow the corrupt West and replace it with a pan Islamic regime...all I am saying is that there is a feeling among many Muslims that the West pursues unjust policies in the Middle East. The brainwashers leverage that perception and use it to brainwash a small number of young disaffected Muslims to commit these dreadful atrocities. Until Blair and Bush adopt a more balanced approach in the Middle East, like stopping invading Islamic counties on false premises, the "mad mullahs" will have a potent tool at their disposal.
...but not a justified one and NOT one that we can accept. They are that..."mad mullahs"....terrorists. Non representative of anything other than their vision to inflict death and harm to others on a highjacked theme of religiosity!
I think that if I were the high heed yins of the Church of Scotland, the Free Church, the Catholic Church etc and I knew that persons in society were using the religion I believed in to justify attoricities such as the London Bombings, I would move heaven and earth to ensure that I was a) condemning their acts and b) ensuring the dis-association of their vision with that of the religious organisation I was involved in. I would also be looking to tell those who stand up in Parliament saying that "if we go about dealing with Iraq we should expect this to happen" to SIT DOWN and start looking at their efforts being channelled into an avenue that would stop the brainwashing of people in order to "make" them carry out these deeds! So sorry, I'm with Rheghead if that is what he is promoting.
Today we see the results of more brain-washed and groomed inidividuals who have decided to allow themselves to be steered by evil, evil people with nothing else on their minds than to use the Islam religion as previously said a:
...tool used to increase the(ir) power and prestige...
...and that's exaclty what we are seeing on our television screens today!
Fred wrote
I don't talk to anyone on a daily basis, not even my wife.
:lol: That really does not suprise me :lol: :lol:
I was in Canada last week and missed out on all the posturing around this topic... however, someone I had met a couple of times and was responsible for marketing an event that is held annually in London was killed in the Edgware Road blast.
A friend of his, a certain Deepak Chopra, had this to say which he wrote on July 8th. It was titled "Peace is Still the Answer"
The terrorist attack in London today has once again created deep anguish in our collective soul...
Around the world people yearn to find peace and give solace to the suffering and bereaved. Once again the clash of polarized enemies clamors for attention. Al-Qaeda takes pride in this heinous and sordid crime, while Western nations seek to bring the terrorists to justice. Yet it would be naive to take the simple way out and call this an example of pure evil and depravity.
In a very real way we are all part of the London tragedy. Everyone is caught in the tangled web of social injustice, economic disparities, ecological disaster, war, and terrorism. Unless we accept this fact, we will continue with our madness of an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. Mahatma Gandhi declared that if we continue on this path the whole world would go blind. Will we ever see through our blindness and create a global community of connected humanity? To promote peace today means promoting a critical mass of consciousness where violence is never an option.
London, like the attacks in Madrid, Bali, and Indonesia before it, should make us want to live for peace above all. I understand how it's possible to respond to terrorism with deep anger; I cannot understand responding to it with anger that goes on and on forever. There are causes behind every terrorist act and therefore hope that these causes can be changed, even as we continue to pursue justice. We still ignore the source of global instability: religious fundamentalism which has its roots in extreme poverty, where 50% of the world lives on $2 per day, 20% of it on less than $1 per day, a world where 8 million people die each year because they are too poor to survive.
Terrorism also festers because of a lack of education, toxic nationalism, ignorance about the outside the world, and deep economic disparities. Twenty thousand children died yesterday of hunger-related causes around the world, twenty thousand will die today, and twenty thousand tomorrow. That is not part of the evening news. Why not?
Nature abhors a deep imbalance. The human species has become the most dangerous predator on our planet. Nature might be saying to herself, "Human beings were an interesting experiment that didn't work, so let's move on." Or, perhaps, our self awareness has reached a turning point. as Inside ourselves we've always carried the seeds of creativity. The next creative leap isn't a mystery. Millions of people are ready to join in harmonious interaction with Nature--and with our own complex inner nature--to create a world of peace, harmony, laughter and love. Let us strengthen our intention
to create that critical mass of peace consciousness. Every tear can be a drop of nourishment for the new world that wants to be born and is making itself known little by little, every day. Each one of
us can help create this critical mass by becoming the embodiment of peace conciousness through peace practices :
Being Peace
Thinking Peace
Feeling Peace
Speaking Peace
Acting Peace
Creating Peace
Sharing Peace
Celebrating Peace.
The Alliance for the New Humanity is committed to connecting and strengthening the synaptic network of the emerging planetary mind.
Love Deepak
Any thoughts on the above?
I think it was a beautiful speech.
Well fred, no points for guessing I'm with golach on this one.
No I'm not surprised, you will allways find some way to justify what we do to others even down to dropping atomic bombs on Japanese cities and what others do to us can never be justified in your mind, the perpetrators must be mad, evil and fanatical.
Don't worry, you are the norm not the exception, east or west Christian or Muslim, otherwise we might see world peace some day.
An article from today's Arab News:
http://www.arabnews.com/?page=7§ion=0&article=67064&d=17&m=7&y=2005
An article from today's Arab News:
http://www.arabnews.com/?page=7§ion=0&article=67064&d=17&m=7&y=2005
Interesting the part about it being a mistake to label the terrorists Islamic or Muslim.
A friend of mine down in the North of England overheard an old lady on the train asking why the headlines in the paper called the bombers "British", she was affraid it made them sound like "white boys".
Though not many will come out and say it in public I'm affraid that the old lady represents the majority on the streets of northern England. Just as everyone clamours to distance themselves from the bombers and say "they do not represent us" the Christian will distance himself from the Muslim, the white from the black.
The bombers were Muslim and it is wrong to deny it but more than that they were British, a product of our society. The injustice they will have suffered in their lives will be small compared to those living in Palestine or Afghanistan but it will have been large enough for them to relate, large enough for them to say "if this is how it feels for me then how much worse must it be for them?".
For what it is worth Fred I take a different view. I do not think these attacks - I am talking about attacks made by so called Radical Islamics, are nothing to do with oppression, discrimination or a sense of injustice, they are associated with the jihad (struggle) to bring a wider Islamic vanguard.
I do not disagree that there has been and is great injustices both in actions and the reporting of what goes on in the Middle East (and elsewhere), but I do not think these are the main contributing factor/s.
You cannot eliminate anything from the melting pot otherwise you are not looking at the real picture.
An article from today's Arab News:
http://www.arabnews.com/?page=7§ion=0&article=67064&d=17&m=7&y=2005
That is a very reasonably written article expressing views that no one could really disagree with. Deepak Choprak similarly touches that bit of the human spirit that smacks of love and peace man.
These articles though neglect to embrace all aspects of the human problem. Everything that has been mentioned on this thread is a problem for humanity and is a symptom of terrorism. Iraq, Palestine, Arab Jew and most of all the Bible.
Lots have been said recently by religious people condemning the atrocity but at the same time carefully explaining religion is a peaceful pursuit and is not connected to the new terrorism we are experiencing. Rubbish. Even in reasonable and decent people religion breeds suspicion and discrimination. Religion also breeds outside and supernatural influences which can only be addressed by some outside and supernatural influence, like the God Almighty scotsboys lady reporter seeks help from. What if the God they all seek help from is not really there? Where do we turn to then? These 4 young men had motives which were fueled by an expectation of life after death. Where does this idea come from? Holy books and their interpreters are another problem and the biggest problem of all is the human beings inability, unlike the rest of the animal kingdom to be aware that all the bad things he is capable of as well as the good things are quite natural thank you very much. All the bad things that are happening is as much a result of failing to address the bad things that Deepak Chopra and his new age brigade fail to address. In their world everything smells of roses.
Aggression is a fundamental drive in every human being and is just as strong an impulse to react to as the love impulse Deepak Chopra talks about. Biblical sin is probably born out of aggression but is seen as something only God can fix for us. Mind you, we have to embrace the particular religious culture (Jewish Islamic Christianity) to be truly saved.
If anyone has a gripe about something whether its a local complaint against our neighbouir or family member, or whether its a more international gripe like the terrorism we see being unfolded by crazed religious fanatics whose ideal of evil is no more evil than Blair or Bush's ability to kill thousands of innocents in their pursuit of peace, then they will be aware of the aggression I am talking about.
No doubt Deepak Chopra or the lady who wrote the article are aware of what I am talking about but their failure to address it is also part of the problem.
Can't disagree with too much there Gleeber. I simply do not fall for the injustice/terrorism link - for me it is more about what they desire.
For what it is worth Fred I take a different view. I do not think these attacks - I am talking about attacks made by so called Radical Islamics, are nothing to do with oppression, discrimination or a sense of injustice, they are associated with the jihad (struggle) to bring a wider Islamic vanguard.
I do not disagree that there has been and is great injustices both in actions and the reporting of what goes on in the Middle East (and elsewhere), but I do not think these are the main contributing factor/s.
Islam isn't so much a religion as a way of life, a way of life that is very much threatened by western Cultural Imperialism. It isn't a vanguard it's a rearguard, they are not attacking they are defending. The wests decadence, promiscuity, pornography, capitalist dog eat dog, gambling and drinking is as alien to them and seems just as much the work of the Devil to them as their unequal rights for women and draconian punishment of criminals seems to us.
They are fighting against globalisation not for it, it's no coincidence that their 9/11 target was New Yorks two finger salute to the world or that most of the pilots were Saudi.
The "them"m you speak of are a very small minority - go to Bahrain, Dubai, Beirut etc on a Wed, Thur, Fri and you will see the rest enjoying themselves!
[Islam isn't so much a religion as a way of life, a way of life that is very much threatened by western Cultural Imperialism. It isn't a vanguard it's a rearguard, they are not attacking they are defending. The wests decadence, promiscuity, pornography, capitalist dog eat dog, gambling and drinking is as alien to them and seems just as much the work of the Devil to them as their unequal rights for women and draconian punishment of criminals seems to us.
They are fighting against globalisation not for it, it's no coincidence that their 9/11 target was New Yorks two finger salute to the world or that most of the pilots were Saudi.
I totally disagree that their way of life is threatened by anything. They don't have to take part in any of it! At least they are free to practise their religion in this country, I doubt if we would be granted the same rights in the middle east!
The "them"m you speak of are a very small minority - go to Bahrain, Dubai, Beirut etc on a Wed, Thur, Fri and you will see the rest enjoying themselves!
That's the problem.
I totally disagree that their way of life is threatened by anything. They don't have to take part in any of it! At least they are free to practise their religion in this country, I doubt if we would be granted the same rights in the middle east!
That's the spirit katarina I knew you'd come round to my way of thinking eventually.
Can I sign you up for the Legalize Heroin Campaign?
I have been away yesterday and today but i still beleive what i said at first. This is that The only way to tackle the middle east situation is with political pressure.
The answer to removing the influence of "fanatics" on young islamic people in the Uk is to tackle issues that leave these young people feeling excluded from British society. It should be to address the fact that many of these young men live in sicually deprived areas, that unemplyment is often higher and educational achivement maybe lower in these areas, it is to tackle the discrimination that some of these young people face on a day to day basis - as fred's comment about the old lady illustrated perfectly - These are the issues which, if addressed are likely to make it far more difficult for extremists to peddle their particular brand of hatred and make it far less likely that yound islamic men are going to see death as better than what they have here.
Article of the day:
http://www.arabnews.com/?page=7§ion=0&article=67104&d=18&m=7&y=2005
Different subject, but this caught my eye whilst browsing the paper, the "local" view on women drivers:
http://www.arabnews.com/?page=1§ion=0&article=67136&d=18&m=7&y=2005
Article of the day:
http://www.arabnews.com/?page=7§ion=0&article=67104&d=18&m=7&y=2005
Different subject, but this caught my eye whilst browsing the paper, the "local" view on women drivers:
http://www.arabnews.com/?page=1§ion=0&article=67136&d=18&m=7&y=2005
These two articles are worth reading.
The answer to removing the influence of "fanatics" on young islamic people in the Uk is to tackle issues that leave these young people feeling excluded from British society. It should be to address the fact that many of these young men live in sicually deprived areas, that unemplyment is often higher and educational achivement maybe lower in these areas, it is to tackle the discrimination that some of these young people face on a day to day basis
Perhaps you can explain why a guy with a wife and child on the way, with a good job, who plays cricket for the local team with his mates would decide to become a suicide bomber. His life didnt seem to be deprived in any way at all. Otherwise you would think his friends and family would be less shocked.
weeboyagee
18-Jul-05, 14:08
At least they are free to practise their religion in this country, I doubt if we would be granted the same rights in the middle east!
Don't disagree with this at all. But I still believe that those who perpetrated the crimes were not fundamentally true believers in the Islam faith. Murderers who commit crimes in the name of Christianity are not held up to be true believers of the Christian faith, are they? We DO, however, provide and accommodate the Islam faith in a manner that would not be afforded other religions in fundamentally Muslim countries. We even change our laws to be MORE accommodating.
They are fighting against globalisation not for it....
Beggars belief why! If they are so cared for and accommodated in the western civilisation, why should they fight against globalisation? Not that I agree with globalisation but to fight against it is no excuse for terrorism! There are other democratic ways of fighting it.
I can understand why they would feel that western civilisation is a threat in the same way that the Soviet Block saw the US and it's allies as a threat in the days of the cold war and armed itself to the teeth. But then look at the Soviet Union now - and look at China for that matter. Becoming more "westernised"? We are not ramming it down their throats - their masses are seeing the benefits for themselves.
I do not think these attacks - I am talking about attacks made by so called Radical Islamics, are nothing to do with oppression, discrimination or a sense of injustice, they are associated with the jihad (struggle) to bring a wider Islamic vanguard
This is what I agree with. The acts of terrorism carried out in London were undertaken becasue they thought (wrongly again) that they were not going to defend against globalisation but defeat it! They firmly believe that their god will give them the victory! And we give them accommodation to prepare to kill the innocents because that's the fundamentals of the society that they are defending against! Hypocrisy at it's height me thinks!
weeboyagee, once again I must agree with you whole heartedly, someone showing a bit of common sense, and not the bile that fred and wavy have been spewing out on this subject
Perhaps you can explain why a guy with a wife and child on the way, with a good job, who plays cricket for the local team with his mates would decide to become a suicide bomber. His life didnt seem to be deprived in any way at all. Otherwise you would think his friends and family would be less shocked.
I cant explain any of it zael.... I simply think that deprivation and discrimination allow the seeds of hatred and resentment to flourish and i beleive that needs to be tackled but i have no explanation for any of it at all.
weeboyagee
18-Jul-05, 17:39
I support it squidge - I think I know where you are coming from! I don't think for a minute that....
...you can explain why a guy with a wife and child on the way, with a good job, who plays cricket for the local team with his mates would decide to become a suicide bomber
Those who are weak and looking for some way to show something for their lives can find some sort of warped sense of "achievement" by doing these terrible things - the others are not weak because they are already indoctrinated (now there's a word!) and have become warped with a variation on a theme of their so called religion. I would suggest that Zael's man was the individual who knew all along what he was going to do and how sad that he was so pre-determined and mechanical enough to calmly allow himself to be controlled by his affected vision!
You see it from the sadness of those who have been affected by the social problems of society and feel dis-associated with a reason for living or similar,... I think you're bang on. There are those as well who have no reason other than being evil minded - and relating it in a sadistic way to the Islamic religion in order to find something to "pin" their acts on!
They are fighting against globalisation not for it....
Beggars belief why! If they are so cared for and accommodated in the western civilisation, why should they fight against globalisation? Not that I agree with globalisation but to fight against it is no excuse for terrorism! There are other democratic ways of fighting it.
They arn't cared for and accomodated in western civilisation.
If you hadn't snipped most of what I said it would have been obvious that I was talking about religious leaders in the Middle East not the London bombers.
Sorry this is long - but its worth a read.... I spent longer writing it than you will reading it if that is any consolation!
The work of Clare Graves as presented by Don Beck and Chris Cowan give an interesting perspective on why things unfold the way they do. According to Graves – everything that happens to people individually or collectively happens as a result of their Value System which in turn is defined by their Life Conditions. If you change someone’s life conditions, you will get a change in the dominant value system and hence accompanying behaviours. The caveat here is that this works in both directions – ie you can improve or worsen life conditions, and as you do, the value systems and corresponding behaviours will follow.
The lesson is that you cannot force any individual or collective to change their value system. You can only help them to do it when they express the need to do so due to a change in their life conditions. It has to come from inside, not outside. It could be said that this fundamental principle or not paying attention to this fundamental principle has lead us to the place we are today.
Quick history lesson about the evolution of value systems, colour coded for ease. We are only concerned here with RED, BLUE and ORANGE but I have started at the beginning.
BEIGE. 100,000 years ago, Survivalistic - the basic theme was “do what you must to stay alive” Today this is often seen as newborn infants, senile elderly, mentally ill street people, starving masses, bad drug trips and shell shock.
---------
PURPLE. 50,000 years ago, Magical - the basic theme was “Keep the spirits happy and the tribes nest warm and safe” Today this is belief in guardian angels, blood oaths, good luck charms, family rituals, mystical ethnic beliefs. Strong in third world, gangs, athletic teams and corporate tribes.
----------
RED. 10,000 years ago, Impulsive, (pay attention to this one) the basic theme was “Be what you are and do what you want regardless”
Beliefs and actions: The world is a jungle full of threats and predators. Conquers, outfoxes and dominates other aggressive characters. Stands tall, expects attention, demands respect and calls the shots. Breaks free from any domination or restraint.
Today we see The Terrible Twos, rebellious youth, feudal kingdoms, James Bond villains, epic heroes, wild rock stars, Attila the Hun and Mighty Morphin Power Rangers.
----------
BLUE. 5,000 years ago Purposeful – (and this one) “Life has meaning, direction, and purpose with predetermined outcomes”
Beliefs and actions: one sacrifices self to the transcendent Cause, Truth or Righteous Pathway. Righteous living provides stability now and guarantees future reward.
Today we see Rev. Billy Graham, Puritan America, Confucian China, Hassidic Judaism, Dickensian England, Singapore Discipline, codes of chivalry and honour, Salvation Army, Islamic fundamentalism, Boy and Girl Scouts, patriotism.
----------
ORANGE. 1000 years ago. Achievist (pay attention to this one too) “Act in your own self interest by playing the game to win”
Beliefs and actions: Change and advancement are inherent in the scheme of things. Manipulate earths resources to create and spread the abundant good life. Societies prosper through strategy, technology and competitiveness…
Today we see Wall Street, The Riviera, emerging middle classes, trophy hunting, colonialism, TV Infomercials, DeBeers diamond cartel, breast implants, fashion, J.R. Ewing and Dallas.
----------
From this we can see that the US is largely within the Blue/ORANGE systems. Blue being Authoritarian and Orange Entrepreneurial. Iraq/Afghanistan are/were largely in the Red/BLUE systems, Exploitative and Authoritarian.
Does this sound like George Bush and current US foreign Policy? Blue/ORANGE
“The unfathomable truth prescribes what is right and wrong, gives meaning and purpose to human existence and rewards the faithful. Treaties doctrinal alliances and respect for borders are important. The world is a rational and well oiled machine that has inner workings and secrets that can be learned, mastered and manipulated. The laws of science rule politics, the economy (invisible hand) and human events. The world is a chess board on which games are being played as winners gain pre-eminence and perks over losers. Need marketplace partners and strategic alliances.”
Does this sound like Afghanistan/Iraq prior to the US Coalition Invasions? Red/BLUE
“Powerful people, (chieftains) dominate, set boundaries, punish and reward according to their whims. Feudal lords protect underlings in exchange for obedience and labour. Pacts of convenience to expand influence and control. Control and expansion of turf. The Truth or force rules the universe and sets human destiny and limitations. Doing duty and being punished when failing to do so gives meaning to life.”
The colour in capitals is the dominant value system for that particular region. The US more ORANGE than Blue. Iraq/Afghanistan more BLUE than Red.
----------
I mentioned Life Conditions at the beginning, if life conditions are BLUE, (directed by a higher power), people will generally obey higher authority and be faithful to the Truth. If life conditions are ORANGE (full of viable alternatives) people will generally test for pragmatic advantages to succeed.
The problem arises when there is a Flashpoint between two different value systems. Lets take a look. US and Iraq/Afghanistan.
The US being ORANGE/Blue, has its ORANGE way of life threatened by 9/11 so under duress, life conditions change, uncertainty reigns. The gut reaction is to restore order and pull in the reigns a little in terms of value system. Predominantly ORANGE, regresses to predominantly BLUE both at home and abroad. At home, the Department of Homeland Security is established, new laws written which are more authoritarian and allow less freedom than would typically be acceptable under ORANGE. Abroad, The US wages war on Afghanistan and Iraq, removes “evil regimes” and help pull up those countries to the way of the unquestionable Truth (democracy).
The life conditions in Iraq and Afghanistan also change, their way of life is under threat and their borders have been breached. Their lands are full of threats and predators (invaders). Their one way or Truth, their way of life has been challenged. Authority breaks downs. Uncertainty reigns, sections of society regress to RED from BLUE as their authority figure is removed. Feudal and tribal imbalances prevail along with the associated violence against each other and the invaders both at home and abroad, Bali, Madrid, London?
So the flashpoint causes both nations/societies/regimes or whatever to take a step backwards and so we see the manifestation of a different set of value systems being played out against each other.
By the way, each move along to a new value system does not necessarily mean better or worse, it just means that the next value system has greater complexity than the one that precedes it.
Welcome to Spiral Dynamics and a new understanding of the forces at play in the world….
The Muslim religion and beliefs I have not studied and do not know of their thoughts. I was raised as a Christian and my mother (along with Christian church leaders and the Bible) taught me that it is wrong to commit suicide among other non-Christian beliefs associated with the Bible. Some say the Muslims are taught differently, but I wonder about their choice of suicide. Some Muslims tell me that suicide is wrong and yet I read that other Muslims advocate suicide to make a point. I prefer to remain a Christian and believe what my mother and the church has taught me about Christianity and its belief system.
The Muslim religion and beliefs I have not studied and do not know of their thoughts. I was raised as a Christian and my mother (along with Christian church leaders and the Bible) taught me that it is wrong to commit suicide among other non-Christian beliefs associated with the Bible. Some say the Muslims are taught differently, but I wonder about their choice of suicide. Some Muslims tell me that suicide is wrong and yet I read that other Muslims advocate suicide to make a point. I prefer to remain a Christian and believe what my mother and the church has taught me about Christianity and its belief system.
Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.
John 15, 13.
weeboyagee
18-Jul-05, 23:31
Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. John 15, 13.
If you are going to start taking text out of context and feeding it back to those who believe in it you're on a slippery road to no-where.
...and ye shall know the truth and the truth shall set you FREE!!! John 8:32
I feed that to you but will you accept it? No. Marion is right. Christian teaching is that suicide is regarded as the removal of your life from its existence before God's timing but to put down your life in order that the life of another is not removed is seen as the greatest act of God's love - you won't accept that but that's how it is for Christians!
But we're not starting on religious teachings - it'll land up a discussion between the rights and wrongs of a particular belief and heavier than that. I don't care for that matter what the Koran teaches all I know is that the terrorists are not in heaven if you believe Christian teaching. As scotsboy said earlier - their just reward is probably NOT their awaiting virgins but a warmer experience than that. I hope so.
They arn't cared for and accomodated in western civilisation.
If you hadn't snipped most of what I said it would have been obvious that I was talking about religious leaders in the Middle East not the London bombers.
Religious leaders in the middle east promote that which is followed by Muslims and believers of the Islamic faith the world over - NOT just in the Islamic countries. What gives them the right to promote such persuasion in a land where we DO care and accommodate followers of the very faith Middle Eastern religious leaders promote in a manner that should harm us - or have fundamentalists use as an excuse to harm us? Answer: NONE!
Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.
John 15, 13.
When I read that verse in my bible I see the verse printed in red which means they are the words of my Lord & Savior Jesus Christ. I believe that Christ's love was not only in words but also in His (Christ's) sacrificial death. Yes, I believe he gladly gave His life up for me but I do not consider that suicide. You are free to believe what you want to believe, but I don't have to agree with you. I don't believe that Jessus Christ was a mere man, but I believe that he was God in the flesh.
cliffhbuber
19-Jul-05, 00:50
A fine day and evening to all!
I enjoyed the observations and comments regarding the rationale for bombers of the Islam faith to blow up parts and people of London, a great tragedy on several fronts.
Hands and hearts go out to the victims on and around the subways and the bus, and to their families.
The bombers, terrorists, and crazies, do not deserve a hand or heart.
Perhaps some understanding as to the dastardly quirks of a jaded ideology, warped theology, or just warped minds is in order.
But any understanding of cause and effect won't change a root problem in many Muslim lands, a problem of dictatorships and lack of equal and fair treatment to all.
Man creates religion, (do not confuse with spirituality) and thus imbues a religion with the foibles of human nature, the main ones being the desire for power and control, usually at any cost.
It is the penchant for these foibles that perverts the true meaning of many religions.
If original religion was all-assuming leaving nothing to want (that is, a perfect social and political environment) there would have been no pressure for new religions or sects to be created.The solution to solving the problem of the fanatics, wherever they may be, or whatever their beliefs, is to understand what drives humans.
The are enough examples in history to the effects of violence motivated by human nature, by psychology, if you will.
Over the millennium of historical examples; two truths stand out: One, is that depraved leadership must be destroyed, if it does not change. The reaction to this is in the name of survival. Two, education through formal learning, and through decent helpful example can direct/change the mindset of most people.
The challenge, of course, is to what extent a society can be bludgeoned by brutal dictatorships before its reacts to defend or resurrect itself?
the best
Cliff of Canada
ps - I follow the tenets of no religious institution, but the concepts of decency, fair play, and equal opportunity for all. We are all part of a living universe. Our duty is to protect life and land for the future.
ps - I follow the tenets of no religious institution, but the concepts of decency, fair play, and equal opportunity for all. We are all part of a living universe. Our duty is to protect life and land for the future.
Aha - just what I was waiting for - the next level of complexity is GREEN... cliffhbuber - your PS nailed it just then.
Thats to be expected though, GREEN today is seen in the music of John Lennon, Boulder (Colorado) and the Canadian Healthcare system...
PS. Capitalism has done more to lift up the down trodden than any religion ever has... just in case anyone was wondering. The solution may lie in looking in depth at the things about capitalism that make it work, not the things about it that people choose to hold up as examples of how it does not work.
A fine day and evening to all!
I enjoyed the observations and comments regarding the rationale for bombers of the Islam faith to blow up parts and people of London, a great tragedy on several fronts.
Hands and hearts go out to the victims on and around the subways and the bus, and to their families.
The bombers, terrorists, and crazies, do not deserve a hand or heart.
Perhaps some understanding as to the dastardly quirks of a jaded ideology, warped theology, or just warped minds is in order.
But any understanding of cause and effect won't change a root problem in many Muslim lands, a problem of dictatorships and lack of equal and fair treatment to all.
As a result of the war in Iraq the second largest undeveloped oil reserves in the world are now controlled by American oil companies not Russian.
As a result of the war in Afghanistan a pipeline to take oil from the newly aquired oil fields in the Caspian Sea area to developing countries in the East is now being built by American companies not by an Afghanistan, Pakistan, Turkmenistan alliance as they had planned.
The President of Americas family made vast fortunes from the oil industry.
The Vice President of America was untill five years ago President of Halliburton, the company which will now be building the oil pipeline across Afghanistan.
Condoleezza Rice, the American Security Advisor, was untill five years ago the Manager
of Chevron Oil.
Thomas White, the American Secretary of the Army is a former Vice Chairman of Enron.
Is that what you call equal and fair treatment for all?
They don't care how many people get killed, in Iraq, Afghanistan, New York or London,
they only care about controling the oil becaus while they control the oil they control the world.
If anyone wants to understand why 55 people died in London, why hundreds of thousands have died across the world read and understand this:
http://www.ringnebula.com/Oil/Maresca_testimony_USHouse_1998.htm
Look at the reasons not the excuses.
Margaret M.
19-Jul-05, 14:25
Hereboy, that was quite interesting and well worth another read. I am very impressed by the intelligence displayed in this thread. That said, here's my theory on the cause of terrorism - U.S. Soap Operas. Practically every nation is subjected to this trash and I'm sure many believe that they are an accurate representation of life in America. If they were, I'd be fighting with everything I have not to let the Western way of life within my borders. Take the Bold and the Beautiful for example, the father left his wife to marry his daughter-in-law with whom he had two children. The new wife who was now her ex-husband's stepmother divorced the father and then married her other stepson. A short time later, she left that son and remarried his brother, her first husband. I can just imagine the utter confusion buying a birthday card -- let's see last week he was my uncle but this week, he's my stepfather but I'll probabably find out next week he's really my cousin. They have either all married or tried to kill each other at some time or another. The women are scantily dressed bimbos who have never pushed a vacuum or cooked a meal in any scene filmed to date.
Gotta run, don't want to miss today's episode.
This thread will now return to intelligent responses.
http://www.ringnebula.com/Oil/Maresca_testimony_USHouse_1998.htm
Look at the reasons not the excuses.
Fred, that article is a classic example of an ORANGE value system, see the definition of Orange a couple of posts back. It is the predominant value system in the "first" world.
Margarets "Bold and the Beautiful" is the manifestation of Orange gone bad... with the selfish nature of a few other value systems thrown in, namely RED and BEIGE - this is what creates good SOAP - people thrive on watching selfish conflict paly out on the box in the hope that BLUE will finally come to bear and bring justice to all moving to GREEN where everyone lives happily ever after....with the planet and such.
Peoples value systems are the reasons that they behave in certain ways - they are not excuses, they just are what they are. Where value systems support each other, they can move to a more complex system and evolve. Where value systems antagonise each other, they bring out the worst in those value systems and regress to less complex systems in defence mode.
As they would say in the Lion King - its the circle of Life....
can you help me out -- I'm colour blind
Katarina,
You are not alone - most people are colour blind! However - being colour blind is not actually the problem. Its not being aware or accepting that you are colur blind that is the problem. Once you are aware you can compensate.
Therefore you have no poblem!
The work of Clare Graves as presented by Don Beck and Chris Cowan give an interesting perspective on why things unfold the way they do.
[...]
Welcome to Spiral Dynamics and a new understanding of the forces at play in the world….
Here boy, have you actually read these guys' book on Spiral Dynamics? (http://www.spiraldynamics.com/book/book.htm)
I've been looking at their website(s) (http://www.spiraldynamics.com/index.htm) but I can't really tell how seriously to take their model. The authors' introductory chapter (http://www.spiraldynamics.com/book/Chapter1.html) smells of bovine excrement, and I find it almost unreadable. However, a summary by some guy at the City University Business School, London (http://www.spiraldynamics.com/book/LESMsmry.html) sounds ok, and the FAQ (http://www.spiraldynamics.org/learning/faq.htm) is a bit better, although the appeal to Susan Blackmore's work is hardly reassuring. The FAQ section on waves or particles "isn't even wrong", but they clearly know nothing about dynamics in physics, so I wouldn't hold that against them. ;)
As with many such models, this one seems to be lacking in any form of quantitative analysis or predictive power, and I would say it's much more simple-minded than they make out. Being cruel, I suspect it's little more than a classification scheme, and that a few weeks' elementary mathematical modelling would reveal more about the model than reading hundreds of pages of colourful prose (pun intended). Their ideas and structures seem no more sophisticated than those of Richard Dawkins, and I have first-hand experience of his naive modelling work, albeit in its 1988 version. Perhaps someone has already done some quantitative analysis, but I can't find any evidence of it.
Hereboy, as you say: these ideas "give an interesting perspective on why things unfold the way they do". But do they give anything more than that? I remain unconvinced, but am open to persuasion.
Nice name though. :D
Perhaps the most important thing to note is that these guys seem to be doing very well out of it. ;)
DrSzin, Yes I have read Spiral Dynamics, Mastering Values, Leadership and Change, had dinner with Don Beck too (not in the habit ofname dropping but I am working on the assumption that you need to know whether I know anything about it or just pulled it off the web).
The framework that is built it in the book (beyond the introductory chapter) is pretty robust and I would say it is predictive. The colourful prose gives it some context, it creates identifiers so that the reader can see for themselves certain value systems manifested around them. Without context, there is no meaning, so bring on the prose. It is in our psyche to love a good story.
Don Beck had worked with Mandela in South Africa to help create a framework for moving to an "African" government etc. In the case of South Africa the transition from apartheid to Mandela was virtually bloodless and civilised, Mandela was keen to use an inclusive approach which was non threatening to all the major stakeholders in creating the future of the country. Compare that with the fall out from some more recent world events both in Africa and the Middle East.
Don has also worked with the Dutch police who are very GREEN humanitarian to change their way of thinking so that they are able to deal with the rising threat of PURPLE/RED Neo-nazism in their country. Being so GREEN, the Dutch police faced a major challenge and basically had their head in the sand until recently.
The further you get in to the theory, it explains what leads to shifts between one Values System and another and what the key behaviours are at each point in time with in a System, ie entering, peak and exiting so that you can predict what is likely to happen next.
This stuff gets really good when you melt it with Ken Wilbers Integral Theory, it is not for the faint hearted but it does offer an integral approach to looking at problems, particularly problems within corporations....
As far as being simplistic, simplicity is relative. Once you have mastered it anything appears simple. Lets not forget, complexity does not necessarily mean better. Riding a bike seems difficult until you have mastered the skills to do it, then its like... riding a bike.
Point to note, Beck and Cowan are working spearately now, I read an interview with Chris Cowan recently and he takes a different view of how to interpret the most recent emerging value sytems.
Its all good though or so I choose to believe - each to their own. Until something better (not more complex) comes along.
Hereboy, you are very predudiced with your articles, I am Colour Blind so your system is of no use to me
Golach,
May I suggest purchasing some rose tinted spectacles then? They seem to be pretty popular tool for looking at events from a distance...
They are generally made for the myopic - thats them suffering from short-sightedness ;)
Ken Wilber? Indeedy. As he says on his Official Website (http://www.kenwilber.com/):
In the manifest world, what we call "matter" is not the lowest rung in the great spectrum of existence, but the exterior form of every rung in the great spectrum. Matter is not lower with consciousness higher, but matter and consciousness are the exterior and interior of every occasion.
He continues (http://wilber.shambhala.com/html/books/kosmos/excerptG/part1.cfm/):
This can be schematically represented as shown in figure 4, and in more detail in figure 5. The basic move here is to take what appears as "matter" off of the bottom rung of existence (with all the other levels being higher and "meta"-physical) and instead make it the exterior form of all of the other levels. The traditions always understood that the levels "higher" than matter were "invisible" to the ordinary senses, and the same is true with our reformulation: namely, all the "interior" dimensions (feelings, mutual understanding, compassion, awareness, consciousness, etc.) are invisible to the exterior senses; but we can do so without unnecessary "metaphysical" interpretations. (I know, what about reincarnation? Hang on a minute....)
IMHO Wilber is a giant in the postmodern world. He has almost as much courage as Alan Sokal (see, I can name-drop too), but Sokal's theory (http://www.physics.nyu.edu/faculty/sokal/transgress_v2/transgress_v2_singlefile.html) has a better basis in the physical sciences than Wilber's, so I find myself more aligned with Sokal's world view.
DrSzin, I can see why Sokal sits well with you. As Ken Wilber* says, postmodernity recognises that "every individual is set in cultural and social contexts". The physical sciences are probably yours and power to you. But that's just one small piece of a pretty big puzzle. Seems like science has forgotten its origins and got a wee bit to big for its boots. The objectve study of nature is a contradiction in terms.
Mythology and archetypes have a big part to play and I am inclined to align with Wilber , as any woman searching for nirvana will tell you, its qualitative and not quantitative that matters. ;)
* he was looking well when I saw him in Boulder last September. :cool:
As with any scientific theory of personality, Spiral Dynamics is difficult to understand in relation to my own development as an individual organism trying to make sense of my own world.
Its no accident though that it finds itself wrapped up in this thread about suicide bombers, religion and wars.
I never heard of SD until an hour ago so I have only had a quick deek at the pages the Doc has posted. I'm as blinded as Golach and Katerina.
Not only that but when I read that Richard Dawkins idea of memes is at the core of it I put the shutters up.
Memes are not an original idea thought up by Richard Dawkins as a catalyst of the poisoned thinking he (and me) accuses religious people of being contaminated by. Freud first, followed by generations of mind explorers have been aware of introjection as a method of human beings believing stuff inherant in our cultures (old fashoined values for example) that if they thought about it, may come up with a different conclusion. Thats why holy book purveyors prefer their flocks not to think about such stuff. Trust in the Lord and all wil be well. :evil
SDists also talk about their roots being in developmental psychology but I see no mention of the work of Daniel Stern (how do I make his name a link to his website). Sterns work on the interpersonal world of infants is at the forefront of developmental psychology.
I assume SDists would agree with a collective consciousness being available to mankind?
Perhaps I am getting the wrong end of the stick here but help me understand. :confused
Mind you, no rose tinted glasses at 10 paces, scientology has already claimed that spot. ;)
Gleeber, SD is not about personality, its about values and behaviour and the assumption that these change as an individuals, organisations or societies life conditions change.
Re Dawkins and memes - not sure why you put the shutters up but anyway Csikszentimihalyi explains that "memes are born when the human nervous system reacts to an experience." Action and Reaction I suppose. SD proposes the existence of values memes which "are organizing principles that act like attactors for the content rich memes that Dawkins and Csikszentimihalyi describe."
And yes, a belief in collective consciousness is held by SDists.
As for Daniel Stern, I have not read his work but I noticed that his main works related to infant development were published after Beck/Cowan SD so that would explain no mention there.
I am led to believe that there are some Muslim clerics who are very radical. They go on a circuit of Mosques preaching very anti Western propaganda, even bordering on incitement in the name of Jihad. The Muslim community should take action on these nutters, by stopping them preaching their hate.
It seems Charles Clarke has taken note of my views and is going to bring out some laws to stop this happening. It is a pity that this step needed to be taken, if the muslim leaders hadn't been in denial that hate is being taught in certain mosques then there would be no need for such anti incitement legislation.
weeboyagee
22-Jul-05, 14:12
After reading some of the information on the web sites on this thread recently I firmly wonder if the train has been derailed??? Having given due thought and attention to their ramblings I have decided that my personality is made up of my values and behaviour - am I agreeing with gleeber on this one? Of course my values and behaviour change from time to time (Friday/Saturday night in the Smiddy) but these changes still make up my personality. So, according to me (WBG :cool: ), my colour is definitely......TARTAN!
...SD is not about personality, its about values and behaviour and the assumption that these change as an individuals, organisations or societies life conditions change.
Re Dawkins and memes - not sure why you put the shutters up but anyway Csikszentimihalyi explains that "memes are born when the human nervous system reacts to an experience." Action and Reaction I suppose. SD proposes the existence of values memes which "are organizing principles that act like attactors for the content rich memes that Dawkins and Csikszentimihalyi describe."
And yes, a belief in collective consciousness is held by SDists.
....boy does that stuff make me feel all spooked up. A belief in collective consciousness? Please explain (on second thoughts,....please don't).
The original train of thought on this thread was the London bombings of two weeks ago, but like chinese whispers this has gotten scrambled. I said it already, the thought process behind the bombers is not easily determined, why bother trying to do it? What will we gain from it? Do we think that we are going to be more able to prevent these tragic events happening? I think not! Action (experience): terrorist bombs a tube train, Reaction: Human nervous system responds with the birth of a meme :confused . So sorry, I'm awful thick when it comes to fathoming the science of the mind!
I saw today on television the conduct of a great many muslims in Pakistan (to my mind violent) in what seemed to be a repsonse for Western society linking Islam with the terrorists. What a poor show. Western society is to believe that this is all because of what we do and are? Who's going to be first to relate the G8 protestors or their like to these muslim protestors? - I wouldn't bother!
I'm completely behind Rheghead on this one - it is my humble opinion that if the radicals with their radical preachings can't be shut up, take it a step further - round them up and send them to the places where their preachings and teachings will be more accommodated. I bet I'm not the only one that thinks this!
weeboyagee, Where do I sign up to join your political campaign, I'll vote for you any time
- it is my humble opinion that if the radicals with their radical preachings can't be shut up, take it a step further - round them up and send them to the places where their preachings and teachings will be more accommodated. I bet I'm not the only one that thinks this!
Did they not do this themselves by all nipping over to Afghanistan for a busmans holiday in those 1 star outward bound holiday camps? Is that not why we have been pounding seven shades out of the place every since?
I have given this whole topic some more thought, about 2 minutes worth and have decided that I agree with everyone. It must be the collective consciousness of this forum at work that made me change my thinking to be so inclusive.....hmmmm.... :cool:
I now think that we should have more laws to protect against bad people (especially what they say) and limit everyones elses freedom at the same time (except those who live in the far north becoause it doesn't effect us , right? (Law of Inverse Combat Intensity) ;) because as everyone knows, the best way to eradicate a disease is to treat the symptom and not the cause. :roll:
This is the comfort area that the west lives in, if you don't believe me look at all the major Pharmaceutical companies business model. They make money out of keeping you sick, not curing you (no money in that you can only cure someone once!). What would happen to these companies if they actually cured people? They would cease to exist. hmmm.... scary for them.
I would be lying if I said my main area of expertise is paradoxes...........but it is. :cool:
right I am away for some chicken, half washed.
weeboyagee
25-Jul-05, 15:49
See that this thread has gone well down the line, but yet the new thread started by fred relates the sentiment he shows towards the recent shooting of the Brazilian in London to the very sentiment that started this thread off. Hence me posting on this one.
“well I’m going to say it"[/i]]A more sensible approach would be to send our government to learn from the governments of countries which don't have a problem with suicide bombers.
Since suicide bombers are active in muslim countries, we won’t be sending them there then?
Learn what exactly from other Governments? How to say nicely to suicide bombers "please don't blow us up!" ? The bombers are here and tactics to deal with them need to be in place.
Can someone tell me what tactics we can have in place that would deal with suicide bombers? How do we stop a suicide bomber boarding a bus that has no security vetting of all passengers boarding? How do we stop someone with explosives boarding a tube train and blowing it up? I can’t for the life of me see how we could have had tactics in place to stop that happening. I agree that we can have personal opinion about the shooting of the Brazilian lad but that at the moment it is not informed enough to be able to look in the right direction for accountability – another primary theme of this thread.
IMHO for what it is worth, people who have nothing to hide need not run. People who have something to hide may run but should not necessarily deserve to be shot even though they run that risk. I DO NOT accept that a general shoot to kill policy will stop suicide bombers. A suicide bomber intent on carrying out what he was going to do would have pressed the button long before police would have the chance to shoot him – ESPECIALLY if he knew that he would not see his virgins in heaven if they got to him first!
At this heightened state of alarm in the city of London one would be well advised to stop when asked to by the Police, but if the Police (rightly or wrongly) suspect you are a suicide bomber, I dare say that if I were one, the chances of my continued existence would be slim, running, or not if the Police have a shoot to kill policy.
The suicide bombers are here because of tactics like these, because in Iraq so far the US led forces have killed three times as many innocent civilians as the insurgents have.
If you justify the killing of innocent people by the police then you justify the killing of innocent people by the terrorists.
Now that kind of thinking is just limited in its applied level of thought fred! We’re back to this anti-capitalist argument here. There is NO justification for the removal of innocent life from this earth – NONE, whether it is by the Police or by Terrorists and to suggest (as you are shown to suggest above) that one in some way relates to the other is wrong. The Police may not be justified in killing the young man in London but I can understand (if not comprehend) why they executed the action they did. With the terrorists and the London bombings – I cannot understand or comprehend their executed actions.
Fred your a total prat,…..
I didn’t know whether to giggle or be disgusted.
….as with many of the other do gooder postings Ive read with interest regarding whats happening in london.
Needless to say I made up my mind after that one.
None of you live there or amongst whats happening and therefore your opinions count for nothing. As for the guy being shot, what do we do wait till he detonates his "BIG JACKET" on a train full of people, no I think not, Ive even read you ranting about Palistine/Gazza and alsorts, and as with both these areas, how long do you think it took them to realise a 14 year old with an AK47 in his hands was as danegrous as a grown man, to late once the triggers been pulled, lets not take the chance eh, drop him I say. And as for all these idiots that sing oooooh poor muslim, WE dont let them integrate, rubbish, they dont want to be part of british society, and choose to alienate themselves. I think Ive even read someone spouting the fact that they are ill educated and unemployed is down to us to, hahaha again utter rubbish. Since this country has become a happy hunting ground for freeloaders, they don't even make any effort to learn the language, hence unemployable, hence unwilling to learn, the country is getting crazy by the time a BRITISH teacher can be sacked for not being able to speak Urdu, and its people just like yourself causing it, hmmmmmm I bet there are many employment situations arise in caithness, where by your not allowed to put your ham sandwhiches in the fridge for fear of upsetting your muslim collegue. Waken up the world is changing, believe it or not.
Away, you are on thin ice in my opinion in terms of being racist (and that’s being polite) in your protestations. I know one particular muslim who would give a considerable lesson to some native residents of this country in how to be integrated, save lives of people in this land, to be tolerant, appreciative and to show what efforts can be made to learn our language and appreciate our culture while expecting the same freedom that we provide to accommodate their beliefs. On that persons behalf I take a measure of offence from your post, but on that persons behalf I believe I can also say that the radicals who promote the anit-western rhetoric that can be the motivation of the suicide bombers indirectly also have an element of responsibility to shoulder for the death of the young Brazilian!
There is a big debate in the American media atm regarding bag searches when entering various places. The Police say they will randomly search people's bags but many think the police should target people on racial grounds to maximise success rates.
Here is my reasons why racial profiling is wrong.
1. Suicide bombers are not a racial group.
2. If suicide bombers know which racial groups are being profiled then they will deploy one that doesn't fit that racial group.
3. It is probably illegal and unconstitutional in the US anyway.
Margaret M.
26-Jul-05, 17:07
The Police say they will randomly search people's bags but many think the police should target people on racial grounds to maximise success rates
This is something I have very mixed feelings about -- when they started more thorough searches in airports after 9/11, there were many instances of very elderly women and small children getting a thorough going over. Many thought that it was a silly waste of time. In my opinion, and I know it is not politically correct it just makes more sense to profile. If my appearance matched the profile, I would certainly understand the need to be searched more than someone else. Once there is evidence that blue eyed blondes are bomb carriers then add them to the list for thorough searches. Why dilute the search effort by including elderly women, kids, etc. just so that it looks politically correct? I don't understand why profiling is considered such a terrible thing during a time of war.
If suicide bombers know which racial groups are being profiled then they will deploy one that doesn't fit that racial group.
I can see the memo now: "Every woman between the ages of 70 and 85 who has completed the al qaeda training must report for duty ASAP"
We were in london at the height of the IRA bombings, and WE seemed to be searched everywhere we went.
I didn't mind, because i know our accent sounds Irish, or maybe we looked as if we'd just come from the sticks!
The point is, we had nothing to hide, and we understood the need.
There is nothing racial about targeting the most likely suspects.
I have lived as i said earlier in london my whole life, i have no problem with any race or religion. Fanatics on the other hand do not deserve to be in our country, the preachers who openly put down the british tactics in iraq or anywhere, and i quote as i have seen a few openly try to recruit for such as 7th july. Should be sent out of the country back to their homeland. Harsh i know but why are they in our country if they dont appreciate our values and respect our decisions. Freedom of speech is well and good, but not at the expense of human life
The guy who was captured came here as a teenager and as a refugee and has recieved thousands in benifits since then. Some way to repay the country who took him and his family in , saving their lives their lives, fed and housed him! Talk about biting the hand that feeds you!
Suicide bombers are not new. I remember back during WW2 when Kamikaze attacks and Banzai attacks by Japanese military were the order of the day. I offer the following web site with comments from original U.S. Marines who suffered at the hands of the Japanese prior to and during WW2.
www.chinamarines.com
A very valid point Marion.
How many Kamikaze pilots were there at Pearl Harbour? None, no amount of religious fanaticism would have persuaded a young Japanese pilot to commit suicide there.
The first Kamikaze pilot flew in October 1944 when a superior American fleet was steaming towards Japan. The name Kamikaze means "divine wind" and dates back to the 13th century when an army invading Japan was turned back by a typhoon.
The suicide bomber is and has always been a weapon of defence not attack.
Well done the Police and Security Agencies for the quick capture of the latest bombers.
And the alert public for spotting and shopping them.
I am all for Identiy Cards for be carried and to be compulsary, the bleeding heart Civil Rights movement will no doubt disagree with me. I have carried some form of Identity on my person since I left school 50 years ago until I retired recently, and I never found it a infringement of my libereties, in fact more than once producing any of the the above when asked by any official has resulted in my quick identification and as a result I was sent upon my merry way.
Then I hope that when identity cards are introduced they are voluntary so people who don't see having to fork out at least £100 and probably nearer £400 every time there is a change in their personal details as an infringement on their civil liberties can have one and those who do don't have to.
Identity cards wouldn't have prevented the London bombings, even the government abandoned that excuse.
[quote="fredThen I hope that when identity cards are introduced they are voluntary so people who don't see having to fork out at least £100 and probably nearer £400 every time there is a change in their personal details as an infringement on their civil liberties can have one and those who do don't have to.
[/quote]
That would so not work! I can't see too many illegal immigrants volunteering for identity cards, do you?
No, I don't think they would be able to afford to, even at £100 that's ten weeks wages on Morecome Bay.
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.