Disgusting view. Fortunately the response on twitter seems to be overwhelmingly of the opinion that she's dispicable for using a terrorist attack as a cheap point for Brexit so early on.
Disgusting? How?! She is worryingly spot on.
Go on, hide behind Corbyn and the like while we deprive ourselves of all defenses and blame ourselves and our way of life for others acts of inhumanity and terrorism.
Disgusting, it's disgusting that she is using people's suffering to score political points. It's disgusting that she is trying to stretch that suffering to score political points for some unrelated political cause.
This could have happened anywhere, it's not about Corbyn, or Brexit, or the EU. This is about people who are suffering, with family caught up in this. People who right now couldn't give a flying f--- about your political stance or how right you think she is. You don't use these events to score f---ing political points especially within hours of the event happening.
It beggars belief that you think that statement is defensible let alone acceptable.
And if you dare to make some snarky comment about go and like some more posts then you can go f--- yourself.
I did'nt want to 'like' that post, as it might have been construed as me liking one of the most pathetic things I've read on Twitter, and man, the competition is stiff. That woman is an embarrassment, and I hope she gets the airplay she so clearly thinks she deserves.
I know it is stupid, but if I were to be caught up in a terrible event like this, and was obliged to scarper, I think almost by instinct or conditioned reflex, I would grab my wheeled luggage as we see some people doing. People like me need to be reminded how foolish that is. The situation in Brussels is dreadful and it is appalling to think what folk are going through.
We're actually at the stage where it is politically incorrect to criticise a belief system that justifies slaughter
Who thinks it is "politically incorrect" to criticise the mis-interpretation of Islam to justify slaughter ? Show me one person.
You've just done it yourself. You've assumed that this is some mis-interpretation. Don't get me wrong, millions of Muslims choose to ignore the violent parts of Islam, but it's there; and some sick individuals follow the religion literally.
As do some Christians, Hindus, Jews & Atheists - the common denominator is not the religion but that some scumbags will use religion to justify horrific acts.
Very much spot on... "Us" Christians (I was christened but dont believe) arent the most innocent in history.
Just look back at the Crusades and the Siege of Jerusalem in 1099, the Europeans conquered the City and massacred most of the muslims who remained, yes they returned the favour when the Mamluks ended the Crusades by taking Acre yet other than a few hundred years you could ask whats the difference between what we did to them?
Why go back so far ? Look at the Lords Resostance Army who committed atrocities in the name of building a society based on the 10 Commandments (or something equally as mental).
My point is it is not the religion to blame but the people using a twisted interpretation of it to justify horrific acts that are to blame.
I don't know how old you are ( and will refrain from guessing), so I don't know whether you were around during the Provo IRA terrorism. That remains the nearest any of my nearest and dearest came to being harmed by terrorism ( the Harrods bomb nearly got my sister). Did you go round shouting that it was all the fault of the Catholic Church at the time?
The vast majority of Provo IRA operatives were low life criminal scumbags. The cvs of the current terrorists look remarkably similar.
Just as an aside I'm curious about why you, a Spanner, choose Charlton Life to discuss today's tragic events. are you also on The Lion Rants?
Old enough to have lived through them and been directly affected by them.
My disdain for the Cathoilic Chuch preceeds me, obviously
Your curiosity is welcomed. As I have stated in the past, I find discussiosn on this forum to be interesting with a wide and varied spectrum of opinions. Something that you don't find on many football forums.
I' m afraid I can't work out the meaning of your answer to my question, as highlighted in bold. BTW , it's "precedes", and the word means "to come before". You're welcome.
We're actually at the stage where it is politically incorrect to criticise a belief system that justifies slaughter
Who thinks it is "politically incorrect" to criticise the mis-interpretation of Islam to justify slaughter ? Show me one person.
You've just done it yourself. You've assumed that this is some mis-interpretation. Don't get me wrong, millions of Muslims choose to ignore the violent parts of Islam, but it's there; and some sick individuals follow the religion literally.
As do some Christians, Hindus, Jews & Atheists - the common denominator is not the religion but that some scumbags will use religion to justify horrific acts.
Very much spot on... "Us" Christians (I was christened but dont believe) arent the most innocent in history.
Just look back at the Crusades and the Siege of Jerusalem in 1099, the Europeans conquered the City and massacred most of the muslims who remained, yes they returned the favour when the Mamluks ended the Crusades by taking Acre yet other than a few hundred years you could ask whats the difference between what we did to them?
Why go back so far ? Look at the Lords Resostance Army who committed atrocities in the name of building a society based on the 10 Commandments (or something equally as mental).
My point is it is not the religion to blame but the people using a twisted interpretation of it to justify horrific acts that are to blame.
To be honest I went back to the Crusades because its the main point that I know about... I've never heard about the Lords Resistance Army etc.
I agree though, I was trying to make the same point yet I guess the original Crusades arent an easy comparison as in that instance it was about religion as the Church wanted us to take back the Land of Christ
We're actually at the stage where it is politically incorrect to criticise a belief system that justifies slaughter
Who thinks it is "politically incorrect" to criticise the mis-interpretation of Islam to justify slaughter ? Show me one person.
You've just done it yourself. You've assumed that this is some mis-interpretation. Don't get me wrong, millions of Muslims choose to ignore the violent parts of Islam, but it's there; and some sick individuals follow the religion literally.
As do some Christians, Hindus, Jews & Atheists - the common denominator is not the religion but that some scumbags will use religion to justify horrific acts.
Do you really think these people who bombed an airport consider themselves not religious and just use it as an excuse?! They fully believe that what they are doing is right and will blow themselves up to show it.
Stop excusing religion. it's evil.
The problem is that it's not religion that's evil (well, I might make exceptions for a few of the more bloodthirsty human sacrifice types, and probably Devil worship), it's people that are evil.
Speaking as an atheist, plenty of those involved in hideous cruelty in recent history have also been atheists, I don't think it makes me a bad person, and I assume the same for people who worship Gods in which I do not believe...
the ira want independance of ireland, wrongully or rightfully not the time for a loyalism row.
these people want what exactly?, world domination of islam?
there not similar at all, so impossible to compare
in the last 15 years how many non-islam terrorist attacks have there been?.
I don't think Prague was likening the motives, but more some of the knee-jerk reactions that are inevitable.
apologies if i misinterpreted.
Best ask Prague, but that's how I interpreted it!
It's an interesting observation too, my own father often spoke about the vitriol and threats of violence that he received upon moving to England during the early 1980's and having a Northern Irish accent. I always got the impression that he held back some of it too. Ironically, it was his service in the British Army that had led him to have to move over to England.
He had likely seen more trouble and more threats than those who were abusive towards him in England, but it didn't stop people make knee-jerk accusations towards him. This is similar in the way that some people - not in this thread, but the likes of Britain First and the EDL etc - seem to have a blanket outlook on all Muslims; when actually it's simply not a fair assessment.
You could argue todays Muslim's are the 70s/80s Irish/Catholics.
What goes through people's minds? What makes someone wake up one day and do something like this? You can't begin to rationalise with the plotters and perpetrators because they're not normal people like you and I. I know negative stories tend to be publicised more regularly but Christ, what kind of world do we live in? RIP.
the ira want independance of ireland, wrongully or rightfully not the time for a loyalism row.
these people want what exactly?, world domination of islam?
there not similar at all, so impossible to compare
in the last 15 years how many non-islam terrorist attacks have there been?.
I don't think Prague was likening the motives, but more some of the knee-jerk reactions that are inevitable.
Actually I strongly dispute that the typical Provo operative was really motivated by a principled desire for independence ( which would have been underpinned by religious belief). They were low life criminal scumbags. Look at the "cvs" of those convicted. Furthermore studies showed a drop in the number of those in care for psychopathic tendencies in NI in the late 70s , the suggestion being that they had other people caring for them.
The vast majority of operatives involved in terrorist acts in Europe have remarkably similar back stories. E.g the 7/7 guys. Someone gives them something to belong to, something to make them feel important.
We're actually at the stage where it is politically incorrect to criticise a belief system that justifies slaughter
Who thinks it is "politically incorrect" to criticise the mis-interpretation of Islam to justify slaughter ? Show me one person.
You've just done it yourself. You've assumed that this is some mis-interpretation. Don't get me wrong, millions of Muslims choose to ignore the violent parts of Islam, but it's there; and some sick individuals follow the religion literally.
As do some Christians, Hindus, Jews & Atheists - the common denominator is not the religion but that some scumbags will use religion to justify horrific acts.
Do you really think these people who bombed an airport consider themselves not religious and just use it as an excuse?! They fully believe that what they are doing is right and will blow themselves up to show it.
Stop excusing religion. it's evil.
The problem is that it's not religion that's evil (well, I might make exceptions for a few of the more bloodthirsty human sacrifice types, and probably Devil worship), it's people that are evil.
Speaking as an atheist, plenty of those involved in hideous cruelty in recent history have also been atheists, I don't think it makes me a bad person, and I assume the same for people who worship Gods in which I do not believe...
They didn't do it in the name of Atheism though did they. The fact they were atheists is totally incoincidental. These people blow themselves up in the name of religion, and want as many people to know that as possible.
I don't know how old you are ( and will refrain from guessing), so I don't know whether you were around during the Provo IRA terrorism. That remains the nearest any of my nearest and dearest came to being harmed by terrorism ( the Harrods bomb nearly got my sister). Did you go round shouting that it was all the fault of the Catholic Church at the time?
The vast majority of Provo IRA operatives were low life criminal scumbags. The cvs of the current terrorists look remarkably similar.
Just as an aside I'm curious about why you, a Spanner, choose Charlton Life to discuss today's tragic events. are you also on The Lion Rants?
Old enough to have lived through them and been directly affected by them.
My disdain for the Cathoilic Chuch preceeds me, obviously
Your curiosity is welcomed. As I have stated in the past, I find discussiosn on this forum to be interesting with a wide and varied spectrum of opinions. Something that you don't find on many football forums.
I' m afraid I can't work out the meaning of your answer to my question, as highlighted in bold. BTW , it's "precedes", and the word means "to come before". You're welcome.
I have disdain for all religions as I see religion as a cult. Faith I have no problem with. Therefore I have disadain for the Catholic Church.
Re 'precedes', fanks. Duly noted and will be kept in the airy skull for future reference.
I know religion and terrorist attacks spark heated debate.
But 13 people have lost their lives today. Reckon the debate is for another day. And certainly not who flagged who for daring to have an opinion.
RIP to all those who have lost their lives, purely by going about their daily business.
Especially for those who were potentially going on Holiday.
Being at work five days a week can be soul destroying yet the moment you book a Holiday (whether it be in weeks or months) can really lift your spirits and when you get to the Airport the excitement is there because the deserved Holiday is finally here.
Sadly for some people today that excitement has turned into horror and sadness in just seconds... RIP
The people who did this are clearly insane but to respond to this event with a 'you see, I was right about Islam' attitude is both simple minded and counterproductive. Is it not obvious that this is exactly what the terrorists want and it's playing into their hands?
RIP to those killed and thoughts with anyone affected.
I am saddened that this thread has turned into some kind of you're right, you're wrong political/religious debate. I'm all for debating this subject and reading different views, but PLEASE there are reports of 23 human beings losing their lives this morning through an act of barbarism. I called the people who carried this out 'cowards' in one of my earlier posts, but that was aimed at the individuals carrying out this act. I would ask that today and right now we think of those affected and leave the debate until tomorrow, people who have not been killed are seriously injured our thoughts should be with them surely?
Can I just say that, IMHO, a bomb or a bullet does not believe in anything.
It has a simple purpose in the hands of a terrorist, which is to kill and maim the (mostly) entirely innocent and spread terror and knee jerk reactions.
Frankly, I don't care who is responsible for any terrorist atrocity - it could be the Peppa Pig Liberation Front - the outcome is the same (because shrapnel doesn't distinguish between victims).
I somehow doubt that those who died because of IRA violence, or because of ethnic and religious rivalries in central Africa, or because of, we are led to believe, Islamist terror today would make a distinction - there should be no classes of victimhood.
the ira want independance of ireland, wrongully or rightfully not the time for a loyalism row.
these people want what exactly?, world domination of islam?
there not similar at all, so impossible to compare
in the last 15 years how many non-islam terrorist attacks have there been?.
I don't think Prague was likening the motives, but more some of the knee-jerk reactions that are inevitable.
Actually I strongly dispute that the typical Provo operative was really motivated by a principled desire for independence ( which would have been underpinned by religious belief). They were low life criminal scumbags. Look at the "cvs" of those convicted. Furthermore studies showed a drop in the number of those in care for psychopathic tendencies in NI in the late 70s , the suggestion being that they had other people caring for them.
The vast majority of operatives involved in terrorist acts in Europe have remarkably similar back stories. E.g the 7/7 guys. Someone gives them something to belong to, something to make them feel important.
Interesting view, and on that note I would agree.
A good example may be Molenbeek in Brussels. My understanding of that neighbourhood is that it's crime rate is very high, and young people often take to crime before being approached by recruiters for various extremist groups. I stand to be corrected by @NornIrishAddick - who probably has a far superior understanding than mine! - but I'm under the impression of some of those who were involved with the various groups at work during The Troubles are now linked to the likes of drugs running and so on.
Similarly, I believe you're also correct about the importance of the sense of belonging with many extremists. It's worth highlighting the backgrounds of some - especially the converts - who find a sense of meaning and peers that they can identify with through these networks. Much like young teens getting caught up in gangs in London, they suddenly find an older group who will look after them and almost make them feel safe, with an identity.
These are precisely the social issues that I would like to see tackled; I'd like those at risk to find a sense of belonging, an identity and the feeling of safety before they're exposed to recruiters and other nefarious doorways to terrorist networks. I want them to understand that they do have options as part of society, and there should never be any reason for them to turn their back on that society. It wont solve the problem itself, but it will help starve these groups of their recruits.
I am saddened that this thread has turned into some kind of you're right, you're wrong political/religious debate. I'm all for debating this subject and reading different views, but PLEASE there are reports of 23 human beings losing their lives this morning through an act of barbarism. I called the people who carried this out 'cowards' in one of my earlier posts, but that was aimed at the individuals carrying out this act. I would ask that today and right now we think of those affected and leave the debate until tomorrow, people who have not been killed are seriously injured our thoughts should be with them surely?
Comments
He has family caught up in this.
People like me need to be reminded how foolish that is.
The situation in Brussels is dreadful and it is appalling to think what folk are going through.
My point is it is not the religion to blame but the people using a twisted interpretation of it to justify horrific acts that are to blame.
these people want what exactly?, world domination of islam?
there not similar at all, so impossible to compare
in the last 15 years how many non-islam terrorist attacks have there been?.
I agree though, I was trying to make the same point yet I guess the original Crusades arent an easy comparison as in that instance it was about religion as the Church wanted us to take back the Land of Christ
fuck me we have some blankets on here,
Death after all is what the scumbags want and death is too good for them
Speaking as an atheist, plenty of those involved in hideous cruelty in recent history have also been atheists, I don't think it makes me a bad person, and I assume the same for people who worship Gods in which I do not believe...
Yer, the sort that moan about being flagged on a forum after events like this morning
It's an interesting observation too, my own father often spoke about the vitriol and threats of violence that he received upon moving to England during the early 1980's and having a Northern Irish accent. I always got the impression that he held back some of it too. Ironically, it was his service in the British Army that had led him to have to move over to England.
He had likely seen more trouble and more threats than those who were abusive towards him in England, but it didn't stop people make knee-jerk accusations towards him. This is similar in the way that some people - not in this thread, but the likes of Britain First and the EDL etc - seem to have a blanket outlook on all Muslims; when actually it's simply not a fair assessment.
You could argue todays Muslim's are the 70s/80s Irish/Catholics.
The vast majority of operatives involved in terrorist acts in Europe have remarkably similar back stories. E.g the 7/7 guys. Someone gives them something to belong to, something to make them feel important.
But 13 people have lost their lives today. Reckon the debate is for another day. And certainly not who flagged who for daring to have an opinion.
RIP to all those who have lost their lives, purely by going about their daily business.
Re 'precedes', fanks. Duly noted and will be kept in the airy skull for future reference.
Being at work five days a week can be soul destroying yet the moment you book a Holiday (whether it be in weeks or months) can really lift your spirits and when you get to the Airport the excitement is there because the deserved Holiday is finally here.
Sadly for some people today that excitement has turned into horror and sadness in just seconds... RIP
RIP to those killed and thoughts with anyone affected.
It has a simple purpose in the hands of a terrorist, which is to kill and maim the (mostly) entirely innocent and spread terror and knee jerk reactions.
Frankly, I don't care who is responsible for any terrorist atrocity - it could be the Peppa Pig Liberation Front - the outcome is the same (because shrapnel doesn't distinguish between victims).
I somehow doubt that those who died because of IRA violence, or because of ethnic and religious rivalries in central Africa, or because of, we are led to believe, Islamist terror today would make a distinction - there should be no classes of victimhood.
Rant over.
A good example may be Molenbeek in Brussels. My understanding of that neighbourhood is that it's crime rate is very high, and young people often take to crime before being approached by recruiters for various extremist groups. I stand to be corrected by @NornIrishAddick - who probably has a far superior understanding than mine! - but I'm under the impression of some of those who were involved with the various groups at work during The Troubles are now linked to the likes of drugs running and so on.
Similarly, I believe you're also correct about the importance of the sense of belonging with many extremists. It's worth highlighting the backgrounds of some - especially the converts - who find a sense of meaning and peers that they can identify with through these networks. Much like young teens getting caught up in gangs in London, they suddenly find an older group who will look after them and almost make them feel safe, with an identity.
These are precisely the social issues that I would like to see tackled; I'd like those at risk to find a sense of belonging, an identity and the feeling of safety before they're exposed to recruiters and other nefarious doorways to terrorist networks. I want them to understand that they do have options as part of society, and there should never be any reason for them to turn their back on that society. It wont solve the problem itself, but it will help starve these groups of their recruits.