Terrorist attack in Stockholm

[Thracian]

3 hours ago, Dr The Singh said:

Yes, me, Sikh terrorism targeted only police and armed forces.  Is that better then kids and women, i would say so?

 

The biggest terror attack by Sikhs was conducted by the Indian authorities.  Sad that it is, but innocent people did die

 

Is.any terrorism justified?  It's a deep question, people of.my kin, saw there daughters and wives raped infront of them while the world watched

I was actually referring to the debate on here before your latest post. I've not read much about the Sikhs but a lot about other terrorism including Stalin, the Nazis, Islamic Terrorism, chairman Mao and The Inquisition.

 

It all makes me glad I have my own private faith and doesn't make me much inclined to be lead by anyone.

 

I quite understand though that some people will justify any means to achieve their ends. Pathetic and an extremely sad commentary on the mental make-up of certain menfolk, but there it is.

 

It's a fine line between sanity and insanity. Some people can't help but cross it while others use all sorts of substances and/or excuses to cross it for the thrill or adrenalin of it - whether the high comes from cruelty, terrorising power over people, domination, outrageousness, revenge, uncontrollable anger, countless other things or is just a sick kind of turn-on.  

 

Over the millennia, millions must have taken part in terrorism of different kinds and for different reasons or excuses.

 

It seems that deep down or sometimes not deep down at all, many men actually like being able to kill, maim or dominate one another.    

 

It even happens on here where some people clearly detest anyone else's point of view and repeatedly shout other people down, usually insisting on the last word to establish their need for dominance.

 

What should be done about terrorism? Who knows if there's a right answer? Scientists may learn to re-programme the mind. But I I have to wonder if the desire to sometimes be insane, to take power and control, and all the other things I've mentioned is somehow built in, perhaps even for a purpose.

 

But would that purpose be for survival's sake or to find ways of mending the mind, just as we try so hard to mend the body?

 

Just thoughts really...terrorists will be excused long after I've gone.

 

But I did say many times on here that we should respond to 9/11 with kindness and by marking every victim's death with something positive like a community orchard, theatre, youth club etc.  

 

Shouldn't have wasted my effort really. 

         

        

[Dr The Singh]

2 minutes ago, Thracian said:

I was actually referring to the debate on here before your latest post. I've not read much about the Sikhs but a lot about other terrorism including Stalin, the Nazis, Islamic Terrorism, chairman Mao and The Inquisition.

 

It all makes me glad I have my own private faith and doesn't make me much inclined to be lead by anyone.

 

I quite understand though that some people will justify any means to achieve their ends. Pathetic really, but there it is. .

 

        

 

        

Tony, we have had many debates.  Im unfortunate to have suffered terrorism of the extreme kind.  I'm just glad i live somewhere where i am safe and secure

[bovril]

34 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

That's fair. I think though at a fundamental level though, the ideology and the motive is the same though the technique and result (at a cosmetic level) differ - it's all shit, it's just executed differently.

Really? You think that the ideology and motive of the Brigate Rosse in 1980s Italy are the same as ISIS in Egypt? If anything I'd say the complete opposite of you, the execution (mass destruction and murder) is the only thing that's similar.

[Dr The Singh]

Benny Nd Huth need to get there act together

[leicsmac]

49 minutes ago, bovril said:

Really? You think that the ideology and motive of the Brigate Rosse in 1980s Italy are the same as ISIS in Egypt? If anything I'd say the complete opposite of you, the execution (mass destruction and murder) is the only thing that's similar.

 

Yep. The belief that they are superior to another group of humans and being willing to show and exercise that either by applying political pressure to put themselves in a position of superiority and institutionalise said superiority, or by flat out violence, or by one attempting to lead to the other.

 

At a fundamental level, that's what those ideologies come down to - I could be being overly simplistic and not nuanced enough here, though.

 

Whether it's a fundie Christian pressure group in the US trying to isolate women or LGBT individuals and make their lives incredibly difficult through pushing legislative change, or ISIS blowing themselves up along with other folks in a busy marketplace, or some nutter running an entire country as his private fiefdom and letting millions of them starve...they're seeking to destroy the lives (and there are so many more ways to do that than merely killing someone) of those they consider inferior to them. The methodology differs.

 

But that's just my take.

[bovril]

8 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Yep. The belief that they are superior to another group of humans and being willing to show and exercise that either by applying political pressure to put themselves in a position of superiority and institutionalise said superiority, or by flat out violence, or by one attempting to lead to the other.

 

At a fundamental level, that's what those ideologies come down to - I could be being overly simplistic and not nuanced enough here, though.

 

Whether it's a fundie Christian pressure group in the US trying to isolate women or LGBT individuals and make their lives incredibly difficult through pushing legislative change, or ISIS blowing themselves up along with other folks in a busy marketplace, or some nutter running an entire country as his private fiefdom and letting millions of them starve...they're seeking to destroy the lives (and there are so many more ways to do that than merely killing someone) of those they consider inferior to them. The methodology differs.

 

But that's just my take.

I think you are, and I think you're deliberately choosing specific examples (religious fundamentalists) to make your point. There have been many violent-resistance groups of the 18th and 19th century whose acts you could argue were justified. I personally view a group like ISIS - whose explicit goal is essentially to clense an entire area of religious minorities - in a slightly different light. But, like your post, that's just my take.

[leicsmac]

32 minutes ago, bovril said:

I think you are, and I think you're deliberately choosing specific examples (religious fundamentalists) to make your point. There have been many violent-resistance groups of the 18th and 19th century whose acts you could argue were justified. I personally view a group like ISIS - whose explicit goal is essentially to clense an entire area of religious minorities - in a slightly different light. But, like your post, that's just my take.

 

I could choose some irreligous fundies if necessary - Hitler (the discussion about his own personal religion aside), Mao and Stalin all bought into the idea of inherent superiority for different reasons and ended up killing millions because of it, as is the case with Kim in NK now (who I alluded to in my last post). Again, the idea at a fundamental level is the same - believing you are inherently better.

 

The idea of violence by a marginalised group being justified to make political gains is a whole other discussion. Interesting talk this is, though.

[bovril]

4 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

The idea of violence by a marginalised group being justified to make political gains is a whole other discussion. Interesting talk this is, though.

That's the point. It's different. You seemed to claim originally that the same motive and ideology lies behind all terrorist attacks, which I don't agree with. I think you're moving the goalposts a little bit and talking about killing in general - moving into Leicesmac 'civilisation is a failure' territory ;). The original point was about terrorist groups and their goals. I can't understand how you can equate a group like the IRA or Brigate Rosse with ISIS, and I think it's pointless doing so. People seem so concerned with 'not all terrorist groups are Muslim' (tell us something we don't know) that they end up making rather crass comparisons.

[Dr The Singh]

Read the history of Punjab, islamic terrorism is nothing new.  The doctrine is clear, unfortunately we are at war with with thay doctrine

[leicsmac]

1 hour ago, bovril said:

That's the point. It's different. You seemed to claim originally that the same motive and ideology lies behind all terrorist attacks, which I don't agree with. I think you're moving the goalposts a little bit and talking about killing in general - moving into Leicesmac 'civilisation is a failure' territory ;). The original point was about terrorist groups and their goals. I can't understand how you can equate a group like the IRA or Brigate Rosse with ISIS, and I think it's pointless doing so. People seem so concerned with 'not all terrorist groups are Muslim' (tell us something we don't know) that they end up making rather crass comparisons.

 

Yeah, I was generalising too much before, and it was too simplistic, looking back. There is, of course, a difference between individuals/groups that have power abusing it because they think people are things through various methods, and marginalised groups attempting to be recognised and using often-violent methods to do so (though the lines between those two entities do sometimes get blurred). Apologies for the lapse.

 

FWIW I think human civilisation is a fine thing and I'd like to see it last as long as it can, but sometimes it seems like we're intent on shooting ourselves in the foot on a regular basis and it's annoying.

[Thracian]

3 hours ago, Dr The Singh said:

Tony, we have had many debates.  Im unfortunate to have suffered terrorism of the extreme kind.  I'm just glad i live somewhere where i am safe and secure

I'm glad you live here safe and secure as well. It deeply saddens me what you and yours have suffered and so many others in different circumstances even today.

 

 

 

 

[Rincewind]

5 hours ago, Thracian said:

 

 

Basque terrorism featured in lots of news. Has anyone even vaguelly suggested one form of terrorism might not be as bad as another?   

 

 

 

 

I meant you do not hear of the troubles with the Basques as much. I thought I had written that. As you don't with the IRA. The troubles in Ireland was ended through talks and negotiations. No soubt there are still those that believe in 'the cause' but very few. The ISIS problem is a lot more complex and it will take a better man than me to come up with a solution that satisfies all sides because none seem to want to compromise.

[Thracian]

12 minutes ago, Rincewind said:

I meant you do not hear of the troubles with the Basques as much. I thought I had written that. As you don't with the IRA. The troubles in Ireland was ended through talks and negotiations. No soubt there are still those that believe in 'the cause' but very few. The ISIS problem is a lot more complex and it will take a better man than me to come up with a solution that satisfies all sides because none seem to want to compromise.

 

There's no worthwhile comparison between The Troubles and IS. 

[TiffToff88]

16 hours ago, Thracian said:

Vigilant? The authorities seem to know of every terrorist mentioned in relation to major incidents both here and in Europe.

 

It's why they can't be dealt with effectively that's the problem.

 

As for "terrorism existing in all cultures" whether you're right or wrong is irrelevent.

 

Terrorists or any kind already living within our own society are our problem. But inviting others to come without full and properly verified checks, who might themselves add to the problem, is just irresponsible.

 

And to this day I wonder why we keep doing it. And not just us but other countries too.

 

 

 

 

This might help you understand why we let refugees into the country.

 

Imagine your children growing up fearing airstrikes more than spiders and snakes. What you and many others are saying is that we should make these Syrian children stay in the country of their birth and risk being bombed, just because you dont want to risk the possibility of a terrorist infiltrating the waves of refugee's coming into the safer countries of the world, like ours. When the reality is that the majority of terrorist attacks, such as the brussels and london bombings, and the recent Westminster attack were carried out by belgian and british nationals. People who were born here.

 

How anyone can condemn innocent children like the ones shown in this video to almost certain death by forcing them to stay where they are is beyond my comprehension.

[Thracian]

4 hours ago, TiffToff88 said:

 

This might help you understand why we let refugees into the country.

 

Imagine your children growing up fearing airstrikes more than spiders and snakes. What you and many others are saying is that we should make these Syrian children stay in the country of their birth and risk being bombed, just because you dont want to risk the possibility of a terrorist infiltrating the waves of refugee's coming into the safer countries of the world, like ours. When the reality is that the majority of terrorist attacks, such as the brussels and london bombings, and the recent Westminster attack were carried out by belgian and british nationals. People who were born here.

 

How anyone can condemn innocent children like the ones shown in this video to almost certain death by forcing them to stay where they are is beyond my comprehension.

You and others turn comments of mine into complete fabrications to make a point  that simply serves your own ends and idealism.

 

You're in denial a lot of the time.

 

If the father's and grandfather's of the terrorists you mention hadn't come here the people you mention wouldn't be British citizens and our country wouldn't be sullied by their appalling acts which not only kill, maim and spread fear but serve to insult the faith they are supposed to represent with piety, humility and goodness.

 

Not only that but these people - coerced or otherwise - spread their poison in our midst until it has affected almost every city and biggish town in our land and in so many ways.

 

People like me remember this green and pleasant land before it needed security cameras on every major thoroughfare, before we needed armed police on the streets and massive security at our airports and on every major sporting and social occasion and before we read about underage sex parlours and before fanatical coercion by various means became a norm.

 

Don't for one moment think I don't care about the plight of Syrian, Iraqi, Nigerian and other children who are victims of mens fanatical thinking and their eternal lust for power and control over people - as you would doubtless like to control or influence me, judging by your tone. I care for my kids and have seen that they've never had any religious indoctrination of any kind.  

 

I care immensely for any oppressed or endangered kids and would try to do something about it given chance but I doubt it would make you comfortable or fit with your own outlook.

 

I didn't believe in, or sanction, one moment of Western aggression in Iraq, Syria or any other Muslim country and mentally weep for the carnage all the violence has caused whether by us, IS, Boko Haram, Al Queda or any other self-serving organisation that believes it can stamp their will on the world around them with their bullyng and idealistic fanaticism.

 

Indeed, my preferred reaction - to Iraq and The Twin Towers -  has already been well documented on here many times but very few seemed to agree with it any more than they'd agree with my views on the public practice of religion or my undiluted defence of womens equality and right to shape their own destiny. 

 

And it sure doesn't make me want to continue importing the problems caused by zealotry into England, much less in the irresponsible way it has already been done.

 

It won't solve anything and will only foster more problems in the end as has already been demonstrated beyond all question. But you clearly have your own point of view and I don't suppose you care about mine beyond wishing to challenge it.

 

Presumably you have your reasons.

 

So, leaving aside your tearjerking  video promotion, by all means tell me why the importing of religious zealots should somehow be good for Britain when the world you document seems so awful and when towns and bodies (including so many of children you refer to) lie destroyed by the hand of man in his lust for power, wealth and domination with much of it scandalously excused as being in the name of religious doctrines of one kind or another? 

     .  

We in Europe wouldn't welcome a return of radical Inquisition politics. Why should we import any other form of intollerant fanaticism?    

 

Convince me by all means.     

[Rincewind]

 

[Rincewind]

14 hours ago, Thracian said:

 

There's no worthwhile comparison between The Troubles and IS. 

Which is why I wrote that the ISIS problem is a lot more complex. Third line down.

[Thracian]

2 hours ago, Rincewind said:

Which is why I wrote that the ISIS problem is a lot more complex. Third line down.

Yes, I read that and also your comments on "negotiation". I really think you should read about Islamic fundamentalism and then perhaps correct me on my view that, for some, their fundamentalism is non-negotiable even among other Muslims.

 

In their view, what they believe is what should be, whatever the views of anyone else.

 

Intollerance is mirrored on here sometimes.  I'd hope it's entirely coincidental but it does reflect what seems to be a trend in people nowadays, and one that's  seems to be growing in respect of free debate/free speech, call it what you will. 

 

Soon we'll be ordered to like everyone except ageing Brits and they'll be quietly left to "fall asleep" in care homes once their money runs out and they're no longer able to pay the extortionate cost of helping look after those whose care is subsidised (by them) and with the consent of local councils, so I read recently.

 

Cynical? You bet I am.    

 

.  

 

[Finnegan]

57 minutes ago, Thracian said:

Soon we'll be ordered to like everyone except ageing Brits and they'll be quietly left to "fall asleep" in care homes once their money runs out and they're no longer able to pay the extortionate cost of helping look after those whose care is subsidised (by them) and with the consent of local councils, so I read recently.

 

Cynical? You bet I am.    

 

That's not cynicism, it's pathetically absurd paranoia with no basis in reality.

 

It could be called reductio ad absurdum if it wasn't for your track record of apparently really believing this shit.

[Thracian]

 

45 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

That's not cynicism, it's pathetically absurd paranoia with no basis in reality.

 

It could be called reductio ad absurdum if it wasn't for your track record of apparently really believing this shit.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/insurance/longtermcare/10435265/Care-home-fees-the-scandal-of-secret-mark-ups.html

 

Most of it's there to be seen in black and white.

 

And I've heard lots of comments about standards of care falling when people's money starts to run out. I suppose you'd presume they were all lying.

 

But this gives enough information across a wide spectrum to indicate how poor standards of care can become for various reasons.

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4657805/

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Finnegan]

Your point wasn't that standards of elderly care are poor, your point was the usual "PC gone mad" shit about being forced to pander to every group except ageing (ie, not these modern liberal younguns) white* Brits.

 

 

(*I'm well aware you'll protest that part vehemently with faux outrage to save face but, yknow, cynical? You bet I am.)

[Thracian]

1 hour ago, Finnegan said:

Your point wasn't that standards of elderly care are poor, your point was the usual "PC gone mad" shit about being forced to pander to every group except ageing (ie, not these modern liberal younguns) white* Brits.

 

 

(*I'm well aware you'll protest that part vehemently with faux outrage to save face but, yknow, cynical? You bet I am.)

I don't need to "save face".

 

There's evidence aplenty about the pandering to particular groups and the stifling of debate/lack of open frankness about policy as plainly demonstrated going back to when Blair opened the immigration flood gates by stealth and followed up with blatant areas of discrimination he diluted as being "positive" but were declaredly discriminatory however the notion was packaged.

 

The same applies to women. We say we stand for womens equal rights and yet invite and allow people to live here who refuse to accept those rights or who show no wilingness to let them be practiced.

 

One of the worst things for young people (or the "modern liberal younguns" you mention) is their having been so systematically brainwashed into human rights thinking at school/college/work/etc, they've become parrots to the cause while seemingly ignoring the unfairness of consequences, a couple of which have been highlighted in today's papers (but which I won't bother highlighting unless you particularly want them).

 

When a rapist ends up entitled to several times more compensation than his victim it's pretty pathetic in my eyes even if it may be somehow excusable to the human rights defenders due to the inadequacies of the law and its application/administration, rather than any fault of the initial offender   .

 

The other example involved £50,000 compensation (from memory) for a serial offender who again, had a case under human rights law.  

 

As for the notion of free speech and free debate as affected by the PC watchdogs have you really not noticed how dramatically it's being stifled and how carefully people have to talk about anything nowadays particularly in the press or on television but increasingly on social media as well. Or are you in denial on that too?

 

Anyway time for some gardening and a rest from the politics of general chat. Almost any time spent on this section of Foxestalk gets me down due to laws and decisions that see innocent people having their lives ruined, while perpetrators get chance to take the piss in one way or another.     

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

.     

[DJ Barry Hammond]

 

Wow, quite a tangent here.

[Finnegan]

3 minutes ago, DJ Barry Hammond said:

 

Wow, quite a tangent here.

 

Welcome to FoxesTalk the internet. 

[Rincewind]

I have not been 'brainwashed' into believing in human rights and equality and fairness. It comes to me naturally. It is a shame.  not everybody feels the same.