Islamist views and related crime stories in the UK - how to deal with it

OP

Original post by de_monies

OK. Let's play devils advocate here. Statistically, your average serial killer is a white male, so according to you, all white males should be monitored for any possible serial killing motives that they may have

serial killing is quite a remote crime and notoriously hard to predict or surveil - in most cases the criminal is a nutcase and unpredictable. Extremists on the other hand are extremly predictable, in their views, beleifs and how they are brainwashed.

as i said above, if a white guy was running around killing people, police would be issuing a apb on white males of his age group, profiling and treating relevant white males as suspects. So its no different. But uk is more at threat form terrorism than serial killers.

Reply 22

Jim-Jam

(This post is by no means a generalisation, there are a lot of educated, intelligent people who also join the army etc!

But I love the teenagers and young people who failed at school, have been dickheads all their life and then join the armed forces because there's nothing else to do, get new found 'respect' from a load of teenage mums and then claim to want to 'KILL SOME ****ING RAGHEADS LOLOL'.

Looking at one on Facebook atm who believes that if you kill everybody who believes in Allah then there will be no Allah.

And these people 'fight for us'. Screw that.

Reply 23

Original post by Mr Big

serial killing is quite a remote crime and notoriously hard to predict or surveil - in most cases the criminal is a nutcase and unpredictable. Extremists on the other hand are extremly predictable, in their views, beleifs and how they are brainwashed.

as i said above, if a white guy was running around killing people, police would be issuing a apb on white males of his age group, profiling and treating relevant white males as suspects. So its no different. But uk is more at threat form terrorism than serial killers.

What and terrorism isn't hard to predict? Are you or are you not asking for the monitoring of all Muslims?

Reply 24

OP

Original post by de_monies

OK. Then do you agree with the monitoring of all Muslims?

not all muslims , just the high risk groups, ie young males ages prob 15-45, as these are the most likely to commit crimes

Reply 25

Frube

3

Original post by de_monies

OK. Then do you agree with the monitoring of all Muslims?

Obviously bugging/monitoring every Muslim is wrong as well as impossible. I was simply pointing out that discrimination of race or religion when there is a statistical case for it is perfectly logical.

100 people in a town, 2 are Muslims. The police hear that there might be a terrorist attack but do not know who will cause it or for what reason.

According the the guy I quoted monitoring the Muslims first in this case would Racist and disgusting. In reality it is logical and could end up saving lives. People who are against statistical discrimination are idiots who are prepared to forgo safety and results just to protect somebody's feelings.

Reply 26

Original post by Mr Big

not all muslims , just the high risk groups, ie young males ages prob 15-45, as these are the most likely to commit crimes

OK. Let's propose that we monitor all white males, because statistically, serial killers are white. Let's also monitor all churches, because of the whole priest rape thing from *some* churches. Tell me also how you'd monitor every single Muslim? Unless you plan to monitor every one who isn't white?

Reply 27

The Angry Stoic

18

It doesn't matter how many Muslims do it. What matters is these terrorist cite that Islam is one of their main motivators.

If Islam causes people to become terrorists, can be used to validate terrorism or doesn't clearly denounce violence and terrorism there is a problem with it. We can't allow a doctrine that people follow so strictly to be so unclear.

Reply 28

Original post by Frube

What do you mean by monitoring?

Obviously bugging/monitoring every Muslim is wrong as well as impossible. I was simply pointing out that discrimination of race or religion when there is a statistical case for it is perfectly logical.

100 people in a town, 2 are Muslims. The police hear that there might be a terrorist attack but do not know who will cause it or for what reason.

According the the guy I quoted monitoring the Muslims first in this case would Racist and disgusting. In reality it is logical and could end up saving lives. People who are against statistical discrimination are idiots who are prepared to forgo safety and results just to protect somebody's feelings.

Tell me then why most terrorists aren't Muslims. If you want to go based on statistical data, you should actually be monitoring seperatist and nationalist groups, not Muslims (Though I wouldn't agree with monitoring any one)

As Iqbal posted above, statistical discrimination does not save people's lives in the long term. It only encourages people to commit acts of terror if that's the case.

Also, do you plan on monitoring the entire Irish community for what the IRA have done?

Reply 29

Original post by Jacob :)

It doesn't matter how many Muslims do it. What matters is these terrorist cite that Islam is one of their main motivators.

If Islam causes people to become terrorists, can be used to validate terrorism or doesn't clearly denounce violence and terrorism there is a problem with it. We can't allow a doctrine that people follow so strictly to be so unclear.

If you look in to it, it's actually foreign policy, a lot of the time, that is fuelling terrorism, not religion. Tell me why were the first documented suicide terrorists, Jews?

[video="youtube;5tEsWRXV_BM"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tEsWRXV_BM[/video]

Reply 30

OP

Original post by de_monies

What and terrorism isn't hard to predict? Are you or are you not asking for the monitoring of all Muslims?

read the post, the is was talking aboit the person, not the act. A serial killer is typically a loner, has no agenda to follow, is entirely self focussed, often highly intelligent, narsacisic, and in most cases psycotic, if not a complete nutcase. They are unpredictable characters even to the highest trained psyciatrist.

an islamist terrorist is the opposite - often fairly unintelligent, gullable easily led, looking to further a cause they have been made to beleive in, and that cause is usually a well known one. They also take 'symbolic acts' like beheading for example which has a tradition in islamic violence, they often arnt bothered about being caught after. The Woolwich murderer was reeling off old fashioned dogmatic rhetoric we've heard all before used by pretty much every terrorist. He has been influenced by someone smarter than him, more influencial. Bit like when young kids are influnced by gun and gang culture form the usa and jamiaca here, and kill people becuase they are told its 'cool' . This si no different.

the first type of person we can do nothing about, it is a medical issue in most cases.

the second we can, its an indoctrination issue.

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 31

tetra-s

You do realise these are a select few EXTREME muslims who did this. To start surveillance for an entire group of people when it's only a small minority is well, ignorant. What I don't understand though is that one them said this:

"I apologise that women had to witness this today, but in our lands our women have to see the same," he said.

They're saying just because it's a disgrace for their women to have to see that kind of behaviour; that mean women over here have to be 'subjected' to this aswell? you'd have thought they purposely not do things like that after experiencing it for themselves.

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 32

Conciousness

Seems a quite obvious suggestion, but, amend foreign policy towards Muslim countries? Might be a start.

Reply 33

OP

Original post by de_monies

Tell me also how you'd monitor every single Muslim? Unless you plan to monitor every one who isn't white?

again you are not listening, i already said it wouldnt be 'every single muslim' only high risk groups.

and mosques would be a good start, seeing as numeorus known terrorists are known to have been radicalised in mosques by preachers, espcecially the younger impressionable ones.

Reply 34

Frube

3

Original post by de_monies

Tell me then why most terrorists aren't Muslims. If you want to go based on statistical data, you should actually be monitoring seperatist and nationalist groups, not Muslims (Though I wouldn't agree with monitoring any one)

As Iqbal posted above, statistical discrimination does not save people's lives in the long term. It only encourages people to commit acts of terror if that's the case.

Also, do you plan on monitoring the entire Irish community for what the IRA have done?

I know the exact study you are semi quoting and it is a load of rubbish in regards to considering the safety of the British public. Counting tiny disturbances by the likes of ETA and such as terrorist attacks although correct has no place in determining the perpetrator of deadly terror attacks in the UK.

Who at the moment do you think is most likely to bomb the British public, Muslims or Bloody separatists? The security services have stopped dozens of Muslims over the last decade from killing probably 1000's of Brits, to argue they are not statistically most likely to attack our population is ignorant.

The point was arbitrary anyway, replace terrorist booming with knife crime and Muslim with black youth. Your appeasing nature is the primary reason that radical Islam has taken a foothold in this country.

Do you even understand what profiling means why do you keep bringing up the monitoring of whole populations?

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 35

MENDACIUM

The solution?

Ask this small extreme minority to actually start practicing Islam. A lot of them are motivated by sociopolitical goals.

In fact, a lot of these actually call for the killing of other muslims!

Astonishing.

[video="youtube;xNBApda21xM"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xNBApda21xM[/video]

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 36

OP

Original post by Jacob :)

It doesn't matter how many Muslims do it. What matters is these terrorist cite that Islam is one of their main motivators.

If Islam causes people to become terrorists, can be used to validate terrorism or doesn't clearly denounce violence and terrorism there is a problem with it. We can't allow a doctrine that people follow so strictly to be so unclear.

this is true becuase following shinto buddism as some east asians do is not a motivator for terrorism in the uk , whereas many young muslim men have been arressted for such, who follow islam, in most cases fundamentally. We know its not just an asian thing, or a black thing, or white (see woolwich, boston etc) So clearly islam is influencing in some way these acts for a lot of different poeple, therefore monitoring islamic sources to prevent attacks can be argued to make sense

Reply 37

Original post by Frube

I know the exact study you are semi quoting and it is a load of rubbish in regards to considering the safety of the British public. Counting tiny disturbances by the likes of ETA and such as terrorist attacks although correct has no place in determining the perpetrator of deadly terror attacks in the UK.

Who at the moment do you think is most likely to bomb the British public, Muslims or Bloody separatists? The security services have stopped dozens of Muslims over the last decade from killing probably 1000's of Brits, to argue they are not statistically most likely to attack our population is ignorant.

The point was arbitrary anyway, replace terrorist booming with knife crime and Muslim with black youth. Your appeasing nature is the primary reason that radical Islam has taken a foothold in this country.

Do you even understand what profiling means why do you keep bringing up the monitoring of whole populations?

Please provide me with (reputable) proof

Reply 38

Original post by Mr Big

this is true becuase following shinto buddism as some east asians do is not a motivator for terrorism in the uk , whereas many young muslim men have been arressted for such, who follow islam, in most cases fundamentally. We know its not just an asian thing, or a black thing, or white (see woolwich, boston etc) So clearly islam is influencing in some way these acts for a lot of different poeple, therefore monitoring islamic sources to prevent attacks can be argued to make sense

Why were the first terrorists Jews then?

Reply 39