quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:


I am a little sad at the direction the thread has taken so far. I would have thought that any claim that terrorist acts/acts of mass violence were "predictable and preventable" might merit some examination of that claim.

I bet you are. I saw this thread earlier; had to go away; came back and saw the number of replies and thought, 'Lordy, Tweak must be pleased! Indeedies! Your guess was spot on!

One thing - should be obvious, but it somehow slips out of the mind - so many of these attacks (the last three in the UK, for instance) involved attackers who were very, very keen to be *known* as the attackers. In the last one on Westminster Bridge, for instance, they could have killed some people by just hitting them in their van. Few shouts of 'Allah Akhbar' through the windows; drive on at full speed ... and, conceivably, get away. Or at least have a chance of getting away. But they didn't do that: they got out and started slashing and stabbing.

There wasn't any deliberate attempt to connect themselves with ISIS, even. They were concerned only for it to be known that they were Islamists - and for their individual names to become famous (or infamous). That's all. As we know here from the IRA attacks - it's easy to kill people (while making it clear why they've been killed) but never be caught.

Biddulph's premise chimes for me. There's so much about these killings that seems to me to be about ego - about massive desire for recognition. If true, it seems vital to me to work out where that comes from and learn how to deal with it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:


I am a little sad at the direction the thread has taken so far. I would have thought that any claim that terrorist acts/acts of mass violence were "predictable and preventable" might merit some examination of that claim.

One thing - should be obvious, but it somehow slips out of the mind - so many of these attacks (the last three in the UK, for instance) involved attackers who were very, very keen to be *known* as the attackers. In the last one on Westminster Bridge, for instance, they could have killed some people by just hitting them in their van. Few shouts of 'Allah Akhbar' through the windows; drive on at full speed ... and, conceivably, get away. Or at least have a chance of getting away. But they didn't do that: they got out and started slashing and stabbing.

There wasn't any deliberate attempt to connect themselves with ISIS, even. They were concerned only for it to be known that they were Islamists - and for their individual names to become famous (or infamous). That's all. As we know here from the IRA attacks - it's easy to kill people (while making it clear why they've been killed) but never be caught.

Biddulph's premise chimes for me. There's so much about these killings that seems to me to be about ego - about massive desire for recognition. If true, it seems vital to me to work out where that comes from and learn how to deal with it.

Yes. It is interesting to ponder that desire for recognition that is so powerful that it somehow overcomes the desire to live. And egos so desperate for some form of affirmation that they end up perverted into powerful urges to kill indiscriminately.

Biddulph alludes to a certain type of masculinity that prefers death to dishonour. And terms like honour, humiliation, and revenge crop up frequently in offenders' statements - it's almost like a contemporary version of 'honour killings' in the minds of some offenders. We are talking about grievances (real or imagined it doesn't really matter, what is going on in the head of the offender is what is important here) that have festered in their heads for heaven knows how long without any attempt to address them.

Is it unmanly to acknowledge and deal with issues like this? If it is, then surely it's time that this antiquated notion of masculinity was challenged and discarded. What on earth is the point of earning renown and recognition through butchery - all that person is ever going to be recognised and remembered for is the carnage they wrought as they went out - not in the blaze of glory they might imagine but leaving behind a litter of corpses.

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

The other point about terrorism acts being inspired by narcissism (which a few of the posters in this thread should note, but are more likely to ignore) is that this sort of vanity and pride is frowned upon in general terms, never mind when its the true motive hiding behind a claimed religious faith, by the two religions which are historically linked with acts of terror over the last century or so.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

The other point about terrorism acts being inspired by narcissism (which a few of the posters in this thread should note, but are more likely to ignore) is that this sort of vanity and pride is frowned upon in general terms, never mind when its the true motive hiding behind a claimed religious faith, by the two religions which are historically linked with acts of terror over the last century or so.

Yes. However it seems to me to be a lot more than narcissism here.

None of this type of violent behaviour is acceptable to any of the major religions. But that doesn't stop, for example, some fanatical anti-abortionists persuading themselves that it is somehow a good and proper thing for a devotee to murder doctors who perform abortions.

Biddulph points out that in many of these cases, the justification is tacked on after the fact, that religion or some other ideology is employed to justify violent excesses after the psychological factors that coalesce and find expression in acts of large scale violence have been set in concrete in the offenders minds. The offenders' need for large scale violence may have long preceded any ideological rationalisation.

This requires a brutalisation, a kind of dehumanisation that has been happening untreated and unabated for years, often from early childhood.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

Greta can you please try to understand that we are not talking solely about terrorists.

Nothing that you have said to date sheds any light on the possible motivations of people who carry out mass shootings. We are discussing factors that might be common to both terrorists (of all varieties, not just the jihadis you seem fixated upon) and other males who carry out acts of large scale violence.

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods



The fact that religion's just an excuse for acts of violence that somebody wants to commit anyway shouldn't really come as a surprise, surely? Just look at some of the half wits who run off to Syria to join daesh, or the morons who staged the 7/7 bombings. Most of them don't even come from particularly devout backgrounds, do they?

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle
Nothing that you have said to date sheds any light on the possible motivations of people who carry out mass shootings. We are discussing factors that might be common to both terrorists (of all varieties, not just the jihadis you seem fixated upon) and other males who carry out acts of large scale violence.

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

I suspect that Biddulph is being far too optimistic by saying that this could be predicted so completely and accurately, and even if he's right, this smacks of the sort of profiling that brings most enthusiasts for civil liberties out in hives, doesn't it?
(Also, I'm a bit dubious that mere profiling could turn up the amount of background information on somebody's upbringing and ingrained attitudes that Biddulph is talking about. He also seems to be completely overlooking the existence of terrorists from less impoverished and frustrated backgrounds: I don't think Anmdreas Baader was revolting against a horribly impoverished childhood that he felt had emasculated him, was he? It's no good being able to recognise the poor idiots who serve as cannon fodder if the ringleaders are harder to spot...)

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

I suspect that Biddulph is being far too optimistic by saying that this could be predicted so completely and accurately, and even if he's right, this smacks of the sort of profiling that brings most enthusiasts for civil liberties out in hives, doesn't it?
(Also, I'm a bit dubious that mere profiling could turn up the amount of background information on somebody's upbringing and ingrained attitudes that Biddulph is talking about. He also seems to be completely overlooking the existence of terrorists from less impoverished and frustrated backgrounds: I don't think Anmdreas Baader was revolting against a horribly impoverished childhood that he felt had emasculated him, was he? It's no good being able to recognise the poor idiots who serve as cannon fodder if the ringleaders are harder to spot...)

I don't believe Biddulph is offering a panacea. But he might be providing one part of the answers to complex issues that have to date escaped comprehensive explanation.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75

Personally, I think you guys must be mad if you think lone wolves are getting involve just because they want temporary glory. Enough to risk their own lives over it?
Some of these folks got kids and family and they are willing to sacrifice their lives for getting their face on papers? For the glory of killing?

Oh please....

The Muslim apologists is like getting too far. Every single far fetch reason except a simple reason of, their religious beliefs, their faith, their strong belief that this is what their Allah wants, is the simple driving factor.

And the denial that such teachings exists in their holy text. If it doesn't exist, ISIS couldn't have such a strong influence on lone wolves. Because ISIS makes lone wolves question what the real Islam really is. The "peaceful" version of Islam is often not the accurate version of Islam.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle
Nothing that you have said to date sheds any light on the possible motivations of people who carry out mass shootings. We are discussing factors that might be common to both terrorists (of all varieties, not just the jihadis you seem fixated upon) and other males who carry out acts of large scale violence.

The US mass shootings? - Alot was revenge for being bullied and was forced into breaking point to take revenge as they were tormented.

The Islamic terrorists killings - Totally because they believe they will go to hell if they don't do it. As we are learning, many of these suicidal killings are done by whole normal people with normal lives and whole families who seem happy and content. So people who got it good, don't go on a suicidal mission unless their faith is leading them there.

What else is there?

Serial killers is a in born gene. It's genetic.

Hitler? He had childhood issues that lead him to believe the jewish blood in him is tainted and needs to be eradicated.

No common factor at all!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

So then joining isis is terrorism? Fighting the oppression of islam is terrorism? Religion is terrorism maybe? Someone tell me wth terrorism is?

I can imagine sitting in court listening to a judge saying you are being charged with crime of religion.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

No, that's more cherry-picking convenient spin extremist distorted Isn'tlam from the Korain't.