steve2 - I think it time to call a spade a spade. Isis is a fascist organisation - fascists tend towards hatred of anyone not sharing their ideology - a hatred even of those who share the same religion or the same nationality, or the same ethnicity or the same politics. They want to root out anyone who disagrees with them and their plan is to establish a primordial purity to themselves and to their state.
White clean shaven man runs over muslims
As I said in a previous thread If Muslim extremists keep committing atrocitys against civillians in western nations sooner or later you will see like minded non muslim people retalliating and committing their own atrocitys against the muslims.
And this just seems to be what this attack was all about.,it doesnt make it right but I can understand the motive behind it .
You keep attacking me and sooner or later I`m going to fight back on your terms.and see how you like it.
This is only going to get more uglier unless a real solution is found and that I think rests with the Muslim community especially their Imans /leaders taking ownership of this problem within their community.
smiddy if you are trying to understand motives then what stops you from understanding the motives of muslims who are committing atrocities? without of course saying violence is right obviously there are still motives. on this site a discussion of motives is seen as offering excuses. I am convinced you are not offering excuses, but do you see my point?
There is nothing to be said in defense of the man who committed this atrocity. It is a result of the binary thinking that sees all Muslims as enemies or all non-Muslims as kufar.
This will no doubt lead to revenge attacks.
FYI - Finsbury Park mosque has historically been linked with violent Islamism.
ISIS could only be described as "Fascist" in the loosest possible use of that term - i.e. as a general political swear word. Otherwise, ISIS bears very little resemblance to Fascism.
Professor Roger Griffiths (University of Wales) in his An Intelligent Person's Guide to Fascism, describes the term as being, to quote, "the most misused, and overused, word of our times".
Ruby456 Of course muslims have their own motives for committing these atrocitys but are they justified ?
Are those that retalliate against them with the same barbarism are they justified ? I dont think so in either case.
In both scenarios innocent men women and children are either killed or maimed moreso than the armed combatants.
Whether you agree with the war against Muslim extremism / ISIS /Taliban or not ,a war against armed forces ,the Isis /Daesh have taken it to a new level in targeting civillians among the Coalition of Nations
This is unprecedented in warfare targeting civillians specifically .And I just think its a human response that some might think its right to to fight back with the same tactit.
The sad fact about warfare is that their have always been civillian casualties when targeting millitary goals.
Think of Dresden germany Hiroshima ,Nagasaki,Japan the blitz of london etc,etc.
I dont have an answer to this problem I`m just putting my 2 cents worth in for all its worth and for other like yourself to comment on.
Surprised this has not happened soon tbh...nutters everywhere.
bungi bill I am very familiar with Roger Griffith's work and he definitely draws links between ISIS and fascism. Indeed its where I got my reasoning from. In shattering Crystals be makes these links while keeping the subject open. Here he discusses the human propensity for entering mythic thinking to carry out violence in the name of good to fight evil -in such scenarios time is eviscerated to make the acts timeless and this has as much to do with secular motives, political motives, social motives as with religious motives. He draws links between the soldier, the fascist and the lone wolf terrorist.
smiddy I generally talk about motives without offering justifications. this for me is key to understanding why certain issues come back again and again. I don't offer justifications for violence as this gets in the way of understanding and of seeking solutions.
bungi here is the abstract for Roger Griffiths work
This article prepares the conceptual ground for a new heuristic approach to understanding acts of political violence that consciously incur the risk of death to their perpetrators. It focuses on the deep-seated human drive to escape the futility and emptiness induced by clock-time (chronos), and the way a sense of being ‘chosen’ for a mission of destruction can precipitate the experience of being reborn in a new supra-individual dimension (‘dream time’). At this point the etymological connotations of ‘self-sacrifice’ and ‘fanatic’ acquire a new significance, since the personal palingenesis experienced by the soldier or terrorist confronting death may rehearse archetypal patterns of mystic purification and immortality. This ‘chrono-ethological’ perspective on extreme political violence is elaborated by considering the devastating impact that Western modernity has had on the access to states of ‘self-transcendence’ available in traditional religious culture. It is then applied to examples of inter-war fascist paramilitarism and contemporary ‘lone-wolf’ terrorism.
Thanks for that posting that extract.
Certainly, the more extreme political ideologies are quite capable of producing the "suicide bomber" mentality in their adherents. That was observed amongst the more die-hard Communist fighters during the Malayan Emergency (1948-1960). It was also very much noted during the First Indochina War (1946-1954), in which each Viet Minh unit had a contingent of "Death Volunteers" - Suicide Bombers by today's definition (See Bernard B. Fall's Hell in a Very Small Place- the Siege of Dien Bien Phu). Interestingly, though, this was done under the banner of Communism rather than Fascism.