Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Knife incident in Russell Square - One dead, five injured Watch

    Online

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lahorizon)
    But Islamophobia does exist such that people automatically assume all Muslims are terrorists and ridicule them.
    There really aren't very many of those. Certainly not enough to have a separate word that is then used to label all criticism of Islam.

    What you may be thinking of are people who dislike Muslims because (in their eyes) they are "brown foreigners". There are already words for these people - racists, xenophobes, even possibly anti-Muslim bigot - that describe them far more accurately than "Islamophobe".

    That's what Islamophobia is- irrational phobia of Muslims. It is different from criticizing Islam -the religion itself.
    No. That would be "Muslimophobia".
    Do people have reasonable cause to fear Islam? Judging by the events of recent rears, yes, they probably do, so it is arguably not irrational, so the name is inappropriate. And we both know that the word is not solely reserved for those who fear Islam, whether their fear is justified or not.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Unfortunate that the religion of Islam is being blamed once again
    Online

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Betelgeuse-)
    I disagree with you on 1. Humans can become desensitised to violence and depravity and also be convinced that such violence is for a greater cause or worthwhile. Our history up to this very day is littered with "inhumane" violence justified for the greater good.
    Even in an extended conflict context, the ability to deliberately kill unarmed civilians requires a disconnect from normal human empathetic behaviour.
    The modern military conducts evaluations to avoid such people being involved in combat situations.

    I sort of agree on 2
    Point 2 was a little disingenuous, I admit. I was basically proposing a argument that demonstrated a clear double standard in assessing such events and the apportioning of blame, ie. All x don't kill, therefore killing isn't caused by x. If x is ideological in nature, the argument is accepted as valid. If x is psychotic in nature, it is not.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    Even in an extended conflict context, the ability to deliberately kill unarmed civilians requires a disconnect from normal human empathetic behaviour.
    The modern military conducts evaluations to avoid such people being involved in combat situations.
    What is normal human empathetic behavior? China and India are rife with people accidentally running over toddlers and old people, stopping and then reversing over them to kill them before driving away. In places like Brazil and the far east, its very common for extremely brutal road accidents to happen where trucks crush peoples brains and intestines out over the road and dozens of people congregate intently filming on their phones and laughing and joking at the entertainment.... They are not all mentally ill - The former are making selfish rational decisions about their own welfare, the latter are so desensitised to such brutal tragedies that the horror before them isnt registering what we would deem normal empathetic behavior

    (Original post by QE2)
    Pont 2 was a little disingenuous, I admit. I was basically proposing a argument that demonstrated a clear double standard in assessing such events and the apportioning of blame, ie. All x don't kill, therefore killing isn't caused by x. If x is ideological in nature, the argument is accepted as valid. If x is psychotic in nature, it is not.
    I see (I think)
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Bloody Islam!


    ...oh, wait. I guess it wasn't motivated by Islam after all.




    R.I.P and bring back and give him the death penalty!
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    Er, no. It is the opposite argument to that used by the US gun lobby to explain mass shootings!

    They always blame mental illness (unless it is found to be tourism).
    If you read it again, you will see I was explaining that as the vast majority of people with mental illness do not commit such attacks, then mental illness cannot be blamed - in the same way people claim that you cannot blame an ideology for the actions of people under its influence.

    Or to put it simply, if the argument "Most Muslims are peaceful so you cannot blame Islam if some are violent" is true, then the argument "Most mentally ill people are peaceful so you can't blame mental illness if some are violent" must also be true.
    I see now.. ha!
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lahorizon)
    If a person is white and murders someone in the street, they are mentally ill. (See Jo Cox)
    If a person is brown and murders someone in the street, they are an Islamic terrorist.
    Deluded Muslims with severe victim complexes and their useful idiots - ie social justice warriors - often espouse this narrative but, since it doesn't stand up to scrutiny, you're talking out your arse I'm afraid.

    One obvious example where an incident involving a Muslim where the media overwhelmingly put it down to mental illness was one at Leytonstone (he of "you ain't no Muslim, Bruv!" fame. Another is the very one we're talking about now* unless you're thinking he's the only non-Muslim person of Somali heritage in the world lol

    *An obvious example of a white attacker being overwhelmingly labelled a terrorist by the media is Anders Brevik. There are plenty of others too.*

    So you can get the chip off your victim complex shoulder and get back to reality....
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    Er, no. It is the opposite argument to that used by the US gun lobby to explain mass shootings!

    They always blame mental illness (unless it is found to be tourism).
    If you read it again, you will see I was explaining that as the vast majority of people with mental illness do not commit such attacks, then mental illness cannot be blamed - in the same way people claim that you cannot blame an ideology for the actions of people under its influence.

    Or to put it simply, if the argument "Most Muslims are peaceful so you cannot blame Islam if some are violent" is true, then the argument "Most mentally ill people are peaceful so you can't blame mental illness if some are violent" must also be true.
    Of course not all mentally ill people commit crimes. However there is certainly an argument that if you hold strong religious or far-right beliefs, that you may be more likely to act irrationally (ie criminal acts) if you are mentally ill.

    That's not at all to say all terrorists are mentally ill or that all mentally ill people are terrorists, but just that if someone has incredibly strong religious/ political beliefs, then having a mental illness may well lead to that person carrying out such attacks.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pulse.)
    That's from 2015 lol

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I dont see anyone getting attacked with a knife in that video.....
    Online

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    Of course not all mentally ill people commit crimes. However there is certainly an argument that if you hold strong religious or far-right beliefs, that you may be more likely to act irrationally (ie criminal acts) if you are mentally ill.
    Almost certainly true.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NickLCFC)
    safe to say that this attack had absolutely nothing to do with Islam. No true Muslim would carry out an act like this
    Religion of Peace: "So when you meet those who disbelieve, then strike the necks until .. you have subdued the[m]" 47:4
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HanSoloLuck)
    Ah, the non-conclusionists are out in force I see. It's like something from a Monty Python sketch, completely surreal. Come out and defend Muslims while they ALL preach your death and destruction, women and children are being raped and murdered on a scale unseen outside of a conflict zone and we have a bunch of pseudo intellectuals looking for the'true meaning' behind it.

    If it were fundamentalists of Christianity waging a global crusade against all non-believers I can't help but think the reactions of these people would somehow be different when terror attacks happen.
    Hi. I'm Mslim and I would never preach the death and destruction of anyone and I believe that both Muslims and non-Muslims are to be treated equally and not killed. I hope you don't think that all Muslims in the UK want to kill you because most Muslims are good, decent people. Just spend some time with a Muslim friend and you'll find that were just normal peopl.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by inspiringtop123)
    Hi. I'm Mslim and I would never preach the death and destruction of anyone and I believe that both Muslims and non-Muslims are to be treated equally and not killed. I hope you don't think that all Muslims in the UK want to kill you because most Muslims are good, decent people. Just spend some time with a Muslim friend and you'll find that were just normal peopl.


    Hey, I voted Leave, and people are always telling me I've ended the world and killed innocent people as a result. I wouldn't worry about it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Trinculo)
    Hey, I voted Leave, and people are always telling me I've ended the world and killed innocent people as a result. I wouldn't worry about it.
    Yeah that's not true. Those people are wrong,
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jape)
    I agree that this attack doesn't appear to be religiously motivated, but "islamophobia" is not a real thing. It's a made-up word that is supposed to pathologise the opposition to a socio-political doctrine that glorifies the basest elements of the human condition and demands enforcement via the threat of eternal damnation. Islam - the texts, the history and the figures therein, not all individual Muslims - is an awful creed. Religion has always been a force for wickedness, but most have redeeming features to their mythology or have contributed goodness to the world in real terms. Islam's texts have no redeeming features. It is a terrible doctrine.
    Islam, in many ways, does affirm some of the general values affirmed by most religions (such as personal honesty, respect for parents and elders etc etc)

    however its social and political prescriptions are deeply flawed : the product of a society so different from the present world, that actually implementing those prescriptions would mean living in a time warp.

    For this reason, all societies which (to various extents) try to find their inspiration in Islam, are not really good advertisements for the religion/ideology itself, and Muslims refer therefore to a mythical 7th century "golden age" as the only true example of Islam's implementation

    why someone should follow these socio-political theories in the present day is the real issue. It should be studied in a much deeper way than it is now
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    Of course not all mentally ill people commit crimes. However there is certainly an argument that if you hold strong religious or far-right beliefs, that you may be more likely to act irrationally (ie criminal acts) if you are mentally ill.

    That's not at all to say all terrorists are mentally ill or that all mentally ill people are terrorists, but just that if someone has incredibly strong religious/ political beliefs, then having a mental illness may well lead to that person carrying out such attacks.
    people talk of detecting "terrorists" as if being a terrorist were an objective feature, like having blue eyes, or being more than 6 feet tall

    in reality, much depends from definitions - and the same for "mental illness". While some forms of mental illnesses do objectively exist, many other are just (more or less) educated guesses, or social constructs

    and yes, you can be a politically-motivated terrorist and also mentally deranged, and also religious at the same time : as to the proportions for the various factors, I would say that they vary in individual cases, and it's impossible to define them precisely

    we are not dealing here with exact sciences
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by inspiringtop123)
    Hi. I'm Muslim
    hello

    (Original post by inspiringtop123)
    I believe that both Muslims and non-Muslims are to be treated equally
    Allah disagrees with you. Quran 9:29
    "Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection".

    (Original post by inspiringtop123)
    most Muslims are good, decent people. Just spend some time with a Muslim friend and you'll find that were just normal peopl.
    this is true

    luckily, most Muslims don't follow the Quran
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mariachi)
    hello



    Allah disagrees with you. Quran 9:29
    "Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection".

    this is true

    luckily, most Muslims don't follow the Quran
    That quotation doesn't not disagree. Muslims pay a different form of tax- zakat, and non-Muslims pay jizya. Different but equal
    Online

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by inspiringtop123)
    That quotation doesn't not disagree. Muslims pay a different form of tax- zakat, and non-Muslims pay jizya. Different but equal
    Yes. The difference being that if a Muslim doesn't pay zakat, Allah isn't pleased. If a dhimmi doesn't pay jizya their "life and property are not protected", as Muhammad said (I think Al Capone also said something similar).
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by inspiringtop123)
    That quotation doesn't not disagree. Muslims pay a different form of tax- zakat, and non-Muslims pay jizya. Different but equal
    "Equal", but "in a state of subjection".
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Brussels sprouts
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.