This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Why are "Islamic Extremists" often not religious at all?

People who are disenfranchised and who have identity problems are more likely to be drawn to terrorist organisations than people who are highly devout.

Dr. Malise Ruthven, an expert in the field of Islamic studies, notes that “apocalyptic movements under a charismatic leader have always appealed to people who suffer from social alienation or who are seeking some new source of meaning”

According to Richard Barrett, a former director of global counter-terrorism operations for MI6, "Isis projects a strong identity and sense of purpose and it appeals in particular to people who lack both; it offers them the opportunity to be part of something new, regardless of their gender or abilities.”

In 2008, MI5's behavioural science unit concluded that “far from being religious zealots, a large number of those involved in terrorism do not practise their faith regularly. Many lack religious literacy and could actually be regarded as religious novices. Very few have been brought up in strongly religious households, and there is a higher than average proportion of converts. Some are involved in drug-taking, drinking alcohol and visiting prostitutes”. MI5 also concluded that a well-established religious identity may protect against radicalisation.

Nevertheless, it's misleading to say that these terrorist attacks have nothing to do with Islam. They have something to do with Islam. In particular, senior officials in ISIS and other terrorist organisations genuinely believe that they're fulfilling their duties as Muslims. This is why we should continue to support efforts in Muslim communities to prevent radicalisation, discredit the views of extremist Muslims, along with addressing issues such as alienation and other issues such as Western foreign policy.

I'm tempted to draw comparisons with the volunteer paramilitaries in the Yugoslav Wars. Very few were fanatical nationalists. They were mercenaries, criminals looking for a chance to loot, or bored lonely unemployed men who thought it sounded like an adventure. Some were depressed and suicidal who thought it sounded like a way to get an adrenaline boost and feel alive one last time.

Of course, it's not that they weren't nationalists at all. The vast bulk were. But it wasn't their primary motivation. Rather, it provided a sense of identity and belonging that legitimised their more significant motives. It made them feel their narrow self-interested reasons actually formed part of a greater cause which included them.

In short, the crucial factor behind Islamic extremists is their identification as Muslims and with ISIS. Whether they actually follow religious guidelines is irrelevant - Serb nationalist paramilitaries would routinely seek the blessing of Orthodox priests as reinforcement and proof of their 'Serbness', and then go on an alcohol-and-drug-fuelled raping and looting spree on the same day.

Reply 21

viddy9

16

Original post by anarchism101

I'm tempted to draw comparisons with the volunteer paramilitaries in the Yugoslav Wars. Very few were fanatical nationalists. They were mercenaries, criminals looking for a chance to loot, or bored lonely unemployed men who thought it sounded like an adventure. Some were depressed and suicidal who thought it sounded like a way to get an adrenaline boost and feel alive one last time.

Of course, it's not that they weren't nationalists at all. The vast bulk were. But it wasn't their primary motivation. Rather, it provided a sense of identity and belonging that legitimised their more significant motives. It made them feel their narrow self-interested reasons actually formed part of a greater cause which included them.

In short, the crucial factor behind Islamic extremists is their identification as Muslims and with ISIS. Whether they actually follow religious guidelines is irrelevant - Serb nationalist paramilitaries would routinely seek the blessing of Orthodox priests as reinforcement and proof of their 'Serbness', and then go on an alcohol-and-drug-fuelled raping and looting spree on the same day.

Yes, I would wholeheartedly agree with this.

Reply 22

Charzhino

19

I think the majority of these terrorists are very similar in nature to the gun nuts in America going on mass shootings (+ Anders Brevik). They are all mentally unhinged with no sense of purpose and are fundamentally anarchists wanting to cause disruption. The only difference with Islam influenced terror attacks, which is a big difference, is that they believe they will get a better life in paradise once they die. And thats the strongest motivator of all and impossible to reason or negotiate with.

Reply 23

swiss_cheese

1

Original post by HanSoloLuck

That the Indonesian government is better at thwarting Muslim terrorists doesn't mean they don't have a problem with MUSLIMS trying to kill in the name of Islam. They do, and they routinely terrorize their own citizens in the name of Islam, they flog homosexuals in public, they just recently flogged a 60 year old Christian woman for selling alcohol during Ramadan.

The government openly assaults it's own citizens in the name of Islam, and you are going to unabashedly hold it up as proof that Islam isn't the cause of Islamic violence... not wasting my time on this.

Suddenly you've changed the topic from terrorism to government corruption. :rolleyes:

Reply 24

oShahpo

20

Original post by ChaoticButterfly

ten whole muslims.

Oh look.

"Truck terrorist's cousin reveals he is an 'unlikely jihadist' who beat his wife and NEVER went to the mosque "

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3691895/He-drank-alcohol-ate-pork-took-drugs-NOT-Muslim-Truck-terrorist-Mohamed-Lahouaiej-Bouhlel-s-cousin-reveals-unlikely-jihadist-beat-wife-NEVER-went-mosque.html

I said tens for every terrorist, which could mean 90 for each terrorist.

Reply 25

HanSoloLuck

2

Original post by swiss_cheese

Suddenly you've changed the topic from terrorism to government corruption. :rolleyes:

No I haven't, that they have institutionalized the violence doesn't change what it is, the government is publicly flogging homosexuals in the name of Islam, they are persecuting and terrorizing people that don't conform to their religious beliefs.

There is a cognitive dissonance here and I can't tell whether you are just inherently bias our incredibly stupid.

Reply 26

TercioOfParma

18

Original post by Aztec123

The Nice terrorist was a wife-beating, booze drinking druggie who never went to mosquehttp://www.express.co.uk/news/world/689990/Nice-terror-attack-gunman-Mohamed-Lahouaiej-Bouhlel-not-practising-Muslim-family-say#

The Orlando shooter would regularly go to gay clubs and get drunk https://www.rt.com/usa/346613-orlando-mateen-gay-tendencies/He was also a regular steroid user http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-mateen-steroid-hiv-20160715-snap-story.html

Paris attacks mastermind Adbelhamid Abaaoud 'drank beer and smoked cannabis' celebrating atrocities, also regularly went to gay bars http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/paris-attacks-mastermind-adbelhamid-abaaoud-6863209

Man accused of plotting a 7/7-style bomb attack on the Westfield shopping centre is a 'lowlife idiot' who enjoyed drugs and alcohol, according to his brother http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3339740/Man-accused-plotting-7-7-style-bomb-attack-Westfield-shopping-centre-lowlife-idiot-enjoyed-drugs-alcohol-according-brother.html

These are all very recent examples, I'm sure there's plenty more if you further back. What do you think the reason is?

Disobeying parts of islam != not muslim. People pick and choose with religion. Calvinists, for instance, seem to ignore the part of the bible (somewhere in Matthew) where the first pope is declared.

Reply 27

QE2

20

Original post by ChaoticButterfly

Literally tens of Muslims.

Spoiler

If we take ISIS alone, the Syrian Obsevatory for Human Rights estimates they have a strength of about 100,000. Times 10, that makes 1 million.

In a recent poll on support for ISIS in Muslim countries, the number came to about 60 million IIRC.

Reply 28

QE2

20

Original post by swiss_cheese

Islam is simply not the problem. If Islam were the singular factor which caused these people to go and decide to murder non-believers, then why is this problem borderline nonexistent in the highest Muslim population countries? Indonesia has had fewer terrorist attacks in recent years than Paris, but it is almost 90% Muslim.

I don't know how much you know about Islam, but it is based on two highly ambiguous and contradictory texts, the Quran and the hadith. Because of this, there are many different interpretations of what Islam is and what is required of Muslims.

ISIS, AQ, BH, etc, all follow a literalist, retentionist, unmodernised version that is at odds with 21st century society. Most Muslims simply do not want to follow that particular interpretation as it would inevitably lead to the destruction of their society, lifestyle, etc. So they follow an interpretation that suits their requirements.

You mention Indonesia. Notwithstanding the fact that it does have a history of Islamist violence, it does not have the same cultural history as the Middle East and N Africa. Islam was imported peacefully through trade and gradually assimilated into the culture. So you are comparing apples with oranges.

Islam is simply the curtain these murderers hide behind, because being labelled as an 'Islamic terrorist' has a better vibe than being labelled a 'one-off madman' or 'murderer'. These 'Islamic terrorists' don't give a single **** about Islam or Muslims.

Yet all the Islamist terrorists would beg to differ. I don't know if you are aware, but ISIS (it stands for Islamic State in Iraq and Syria BTW) has set up an Islamic caliphate and is running it under the strictest of literalist interpretations of the Quran and sunnah.

Hope this helped. There is plenty of information available from reputable sources if you want to find out more.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 29

aceanfaz1

1

From the way i see it the majority of isis are poor people who live in severely harsh conditions. They have no money or food and the only real option for them is to join isis because they provide them with shelter , food and money, even a family and as a result are brainwashed and made to kill and hate on others. The isis are actually controlled by a small amount of extremists who then get the poor and weak people to do the bombings and thats how they are growing in numbers. They are even making children and orphans join them and bomb them in shopping malls etc.. the others who are from the west and go there are influenced by the isis ideology and want the world to become under islamic law. These are not real isis members , they are people who be on the internet all day and are influenced and so they do these horrific bombings, massacres and etc. Some even go over to join them and these are the people that support the isis for example the paris bombings. if you look at isis they are mostly foreigners and the others are people that happen to fall into the trap with no way out.

Reply 30

Reformed

14

Original post by Aztec123

The Nice terrorist was a wife-beating, booze drinking druggie who never went to mosquehttp://www.express.co.uk/news/world/689990/Nice-terror-attack-gunman-Mohamed-Lahouaiej-Bouhlel-not-practising-Muslim-family-say#

The Orlando shooter would regularly go to gay clubs and get drunk https://www.rt.com/usa/346613-orlando-mateen-gay-tendencies/He was also a regular steroid user http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-mateen-steroid-hiv-20160715-snap-story.html

Paris attacks mastermind Adbelhamid Abaaoud 'drank beer and smoked cannabis' celebrating atrocities, also regularly went to gay bars http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/paris-attacks-mastermind-adbelhamid-abaaoud-6863209

These are all very recent examples, I'm sure there's plenty more if you further back. What do you think the reason is?

i doubt 'often' is a valid description. however id guess these guys all being muslim, finally turn to radical islam having been pushed over some proverbial edge by some event or lack of life success - and then get influnced into terrorism. I guess also being a muslims gets them halfway to that dangerous edge, seeing as they are more open to the sort of islamist propaganda that appeals to the ego of being a muslims ad can generate a hatred and resentment of non-muslims ( ie blaming them for all your problems and failings. I suppose in much the same way , dissaffected white males could have ben lured into far right extremism, due to lack of jobs etc and a resentment toward foreigners.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 31

99_Problems

12

The problem Islam or Christianity or whatever religion you want for that matter is people will pick and choose what they want from the religious texts. I wanna drink so I'll ignore the bit that says my body is a temple, but I am disturbed so I will follow the bit about infidels. Religion itself is just extremely dangerous. The fact there are billions who are walking around putting the ethereal over flesh and blood humans is very very scary.

Reply 32

KingBradly

1

They are religious, but they're also deeply ashamed of the side of themselves that they can't stop from defying their religion. It's known as "splitting".

Reply 33

aceanfaz1

1

Original post by Reformed

i doubt 'often' is a valid description. however id guess these guys all being muslim, finally turn to radical islam having been pushed over some proverbial edge by some event or lack of life success - and then get influnced into terrorism. I guess also being a muslims gets them halfway to that dangerous edge, seeing as they are more open to the sort of islamist propaganda that appeals to the ego of being a muslims ad can generate a hatred and resentment of non-muslims ( ie blaming them for all your problems and failings. I suppose in much the same way , dissaffected white males could have ben lured into far right extremism, due to lack of jobs etc and a resentment toward foreigners.

bear in mind that these terrorist are in poor conditions where there are no schools and there only source of education is through religion. Terrorists do not become terrorists because they are sick or dangerous or mental , it is due to the environment in which they live. When there are no schools, no food, no paid work or jobs and people are constantly destroying the area what is life going to become? these terrorists are sick of their living conditions and there unfair governments that dont help and so they form into groups and strike back. This is the point that people miss, the terrorists are sick of the way they are living and islam is not to be blamed for that, this is a political war and to those terrorists they see themselves are freedom fighters who are doing "good deeds" hence why they call themselves martyrs. i dont agree in the killing of innocent people, i mean there is nothing to gain from blowing up a shopping mall or a public area where there are civilians but all this bombing is to send a message to governments and political leaders. it has nothing to do with islam other than these people think they are doing justice and therefore allah is going to send them to heaven. that is the complete truth of why this is happening.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 34

KingBradly

1

Original post by Onde

As far as I understand, Muhammad didn't forbid wife-beating, alcohol drinking, or the murder of non-Muslims. I notice that the OP does not say that the "Islamic extremists cannot truly be religious because they kill non-Muslim children", but instead focuses on comparatively minor actions. I think that rather tells you what is wrong with the religion: it does not focus on what is important.

Good post. It's like when you point out that Muhammad married a 9yr old and Muslims say "she was 13!", or when you point out that he slaughtered hundreds of Jewish men, and they say "he didn't do if, his army did it!", which by that logic means that Pol Pot was a perfectly decent fella because he didn't personally kill 2 million people. Utterly callous.

Reply 35

welshiee

1

If you attack a follower of Islam its Islamaphobia and has everything to do with the religion. You did it because of their religion.

If a follower of Islam attacks you its got nothing to do with the religion.

The illogical minds of idiots.

Reply 36

swiss_cheese

1

Original post by QE2

I don't know how much you know about Islam, but it is based on two highly ambiguous and contradictory texts, the Quran and the hadith. Because of this, there are many different interpretations of what Islam is and what is required of Muslims.

ISIS, AQ, BH, etc, all follow a literalist, retentionist, unmodernised version that is at odds with 21st century society. Most Muslims simply do not want to follow that particular interpretation as it would inevitably lead to the destruction of their society, lifestyle, etc. So they follow an interpretation that suits their requirements.

You mention Indonesia. Notwithstanding the fact that it does have a history of Islamist violence, it does not have the same cultural history as the Middle East and N Africa. Islam was imported peacefully through trade and gradually assimilated into the culture. So you are comparing apples with oranges.

Yet all the Islamist terrorists would beg to differ. I don't know if you are aware, but ISIS (it stands for Islamic State in Iraq and Syria BTW) has set up an Islamic caliphate and is running it under the strictest of literalist interpretations of the Quran and sunnah.

Hope this helped. There is plenty of information available from reputable sources if you want to find out more.

First of all, I hope you realise I am talking about terrorists who want to inflict mass casualty on civilians and not ISIS militants, there is a distinct difference. I am talking about the radicalised, often foreign individuals who are manipulated by IS propaganda, and not the crumbling regime of IS militants in Syria. Maybe the ones in Syria do intend on purporting their interpretation of 'true Islam', but these terrorists such as Sediffine Rezgui, Omar Mateen, the Paris attackers, Brussels attackers, the truck driver - they do not.

The reasoning behind the brutality of IS in Syria is not because they are following true Islam. They are not particularly dangerous as a physical fighting force, but their danger comes from their ability to radicalise foreigners to commit atrocities in their name. They are called the "Islamic State", not "Al-Qaeda", "Al-Shabab" - the fact that Islamic is in their name is particularly threatening because they are openly claiming to support all Muslims, as opposed to being one of these minor terrorist groups who acknowledge that their views are extreme.

The Middle East is a desert, Syria has suffered under the Assad regime, failed western foreign policy and many other things. ISIS spawned out of this chaos NOT because they wanted to 'defend Islam' like they're the holy crusaders to save the religion. They spawned because there was chaos and room to grow, their extreme use of Islam is literally them taking the Quran and interpreting things in the most brutal way possible. It makes no sense to persecute Islam or Muslims because a small group of people exploit it to justify a brutal regime in a war torn country. But the point is, these terrorists didn't wake up one day and decide to defend Islam, they are broken, evil people who are trying to justify hatred through religious means, the source of the hatred isn't a soul-centred desire to help Muslims, the source of their hatred is against America for its foreign policy, and for Assad and anyone else in Syria - their 'call for war' against foreign cities is simply them trying to expand themselves as much as possible, because they're smart and use social media, they spread their word and now almost everyone knows about them.

My point about Indonesia is that surely if the rhetoric that "Islam = the problem" is true, then Indonesia, being 90% Muslim, should be worse than even Syria right now? But they've had one minor terror attack recently. Therefore, Islam is categorically not the problem. The problem is corruption, war and hatred. The Middle East has had some brutal regimes, it has been subject to failed western foreign policy, it has therefore suffered conflict - and young people in conflict are generally the sort of easily impressionable people who become radicalised and do these attacks. These people don't wake up one day and say "lets kill for the sake of Islam", their entire worlds are slowly turned upside down, violence becomes the norm, and at this point they become radicalised. They do not go out killing innocent people because they want to 'defend Islam', they do it because they want to inflict as much damage as possible and to harm as many as possible - they know that attacking foreign cities will raise hatred towards Islam/Muslims and they still do it. They simply do not care about Islam, they use it as a vague way of justifying their actions - because being labelled as an 'Islamic terrorist' is more resounding than being shoved aside as a lone madman.

Reply 37

BaconandSauce

5

extremism comes in many forms Take Indonesia an extremist county given they happily mutilate their children in the name of AllahFemale genital mutilation Type I and IV is prevalent in Indonesia;[203][204][205][206] 97.5%[206] of the surveyed females from Muslim families (Muslim females are at least 85%[207] of females in Indonesia) are mutilated by age 18. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prevalence_of_female_genital_mutilation_by_country#Indonesia

Reply 38

QE2

20

Original post by BaconandSauce

extremism comes in many forms Take Indonesia an extremist county given they happily mutilate their children in the name of AllahFemale genital mutilation Type I and IV is prevalent in Indonesia;[203][204][205][206] 97.5%[206] of the surveyed females from Muslim families (Muslim females are at least 85%[207] of females in Indonesia) are mutilated by age 18. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prevalence_of_female_genital_mutilation_by_country#Indonesia

FGM in Indonesia has nothing to do with Islam. It is purely an African cultural practice.....
Oh....

No, wait... If it was connected to Islam, it would only occur in the Muslim majority, and not in other religious minorities...
Ah...

Hang on, I've got it. If Islam bears responsibility, you would not have the highest Islamic bodies in Indonesia condemning it and calling it unislamic...
Oh, bugger...

Reply 39