quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75

Wait, explain how is this white guy self-radicalised.

This is revenge. A Muslim recently used a van to kill people. He simply took revenge on them.

Now did any UK citizen go into Muslim country and use a van to go intentionally kill Muslims BEFORE the Muslims use the van to go into UK to kill them?

No.

Don't try to make this the same thing.

When a Muslim is attacking the west, they were under religious orders from the religion they follow.

This dude is under nobody orders.

quote:

ORIGINAL: susie

quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75

Wait, explain how is this white guy self-radicalised.

This is revenge. A Muslim recently used a van to kill people. He simply took revenge on them.

Now did any UK citizen go into Muslim country and use a van to go intentionally kill Muslims BEFORE the Muslims use the van to go into UK to kill them?

No.

Don't try to make this the same thing.

When a Muslim is attacking the west, they were under religious orders from the religion they follow.

This dude is under nobody orders.

You seem to know a lot about the Van driver Greta. What religion is he?

quote:

ORIGINAL: susie

quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75

Wait, explain how is this white guy self-radicalised.

This is revenge. A Muslim recently used a van to kill people. He simply took revenge on them.

Now did any UK citizen go into Muslim country and use a van to go intentionally kill Muslims BEFORE the Muslims use the van to go into UK to kill them?

No.

Don't try to make this the same thing.

When a Muslim is attacking the west, they were under religious orders from the religion they follow.

This dude is under nobody orders.

You seem to know a lot about the Van driver Greta. What religion is he?

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75

FR

Interesting, perpetrator is a Caucasian dude who was born in Singapore.
[snip]
This dude simply got sick of being attacked by Muslims and snapped.

Sounds like a mental case. I recommend death penalty or mental institution for life. Which-ever.

I don't consider this terrorism.

Of course. If a Muslim does it it's terrorism. If 'one of us' does the exact same thing, then s/he must be nuts ..... not a terrorist, no never ...!

The Finsbury Park attacker was putting into action the sentiments that the likes of Bosco and NNanji have repeatedly articulated on these boards. He put into action the sentiments that have been repeatedly expressed by Islamophobes everywhere. He's just a more insane variety who wasn't content to just hate, he had to do something about it.

If he was a mental case, as you claim, then surely so are those who share his views. Yep looking at you Bosco and NNanji. I wonder what their reaction was to this incident - did they react with horror at the mindless violence against unarmed civilians whose only 'crime' was to adhere to a certain religion? Or did they let out a whoop of delight, smile broadly and exclaim "I was right I warned everyone this was coming!" Did they rub their hands with gleeful anticipation of the outbreak of the 'fightback'?

Perhaps Bosco and NNanji would be kind enough to honestly share their reactions with us - but it doesn't take an awful lot of imagination to work out which of the above possible reactions are the likely ones.

quote:

ORIGINAL: longwayhome

So Greta, explain the difference to me between a lone wolf white right wing extremist mowing mainly Muslims down shouting "I want to kill all Muslims" and a lone wolf Islamist extremist mowing down mainly white people shouting "Death to the Infidels"?

Just to make the question easier neither cares much if they hit the people not intended as their target because they do it on a pavement where they could catch Muslims and non-Muslims, neither is a member of any terrorist organisation and both were "radicalised" by reading exaggerated scare stories on the internet about how evil Muslims or Westerners are, depending on their point of view.

You excuse the actions of the white man because you believe they are justified by Muslim atrocities, whereas Islamic extremists excuse the actions of Muslim terrorists because they believe they are justified by Western atrocities.

There is no difference.

I abhor terrorism in all its forms. The fact or belief that there is a war is no excuse. If you kill non-combatants, or mainly kill non-combatants, to spread fear you are a terrorist. That includes a right wing extremist murdering an MP in the UK in the run up to the Brexit vote, Islamic extremists bombing public transport, much of the violence in the Troubles in Northern Ireland and the Basque separatists. It also includes the twentieth century bombings of Guernica, London, Dresden and Hiroshima.

It doesn't matter how much you believe in your cause, when you kill or maim the public to make a partisan or political point or to terrify a population into capitulation you are a terrorist.

quote:

ORIGINAL: susie

quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75

Wait, explain how is this white guy self-radicalised.

This is revenge. A Muslim recently used a van to kill people. He simply took revenge on them.

Now did any UK citizen go into Muslim country and use a van to go intentionally kill Muslims BEFORE the Muslims use the van to go into UK to kill them?

No.

Don't try to make this the same thing.

When a Muslim is attacking the west, they were under religious orders from the religion they follow.

This dude is under nobody orders.

You seem to know a lot about the Van driver Greta. What religion is he?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: longwayhome

So Greta, explain the difference to me between a lone wolf white right wing extremist mowing mainly Muslims down shouting "I want to kill all Muslims" and a lone wolf Islamist extremist mowing down mainly white people shouting "Death to the Infidels"?

Just to make the question easier neither cares much if they hit the people not intended as their target because they do it on a pavement where they could catch Muslims and non-Muslims, neither is a member of any terrorist organisation and both were "radicalised" by reading exaggerated scare stories on the internet about how evil Muslims or Westerners are, depending on their point of view.

You excuse the actions of the white man because you believe they are justified by Muslim atrocities, whereas Islamic extremists excuse the actions of Muslim terrorists because they believe they are justified by Western atrocities.

There is no difference.

I abhor terrorism in all its forms. The fact or belief that there is a war is no excuse. If you kill non-combatants, or mainly kill non-combatants, to spread fear you are a terrorist. That includes a right wing extremist murdering an MP in the UK in the run up to the Brexit vote, Islamic extremists bombing public transport, much of the violence in the Troubles in Northern Ireland and the Basque separatists. It also includes the twentieth century bombings of Guernica, London, Dresden and Hiroshima.

It doesn't matter how much you believe in your cause, when you kill or maim the public to make a partisan or political point or to terrify a population into capitulation you are a terrorist.

You'll have to provide a link to the whacko being a right wing extremist. I haven't seen that in any news. Or is it just your cartoon projection?

quote:

ORIGINAL: longwayhome

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: longwayhome

So Greta, explain the difference to me between a lone wolf white right wing extremist mowing mainly Muslims down shouting "I want to kill all Muslims" and a lone wolf Islamist extremist mowing down mainly white people shouting "Death to the Infidels"?

Just to make the question easier neither cares much if they hit the people not intended as their target because they do it on a pavement where they could catch Muslims and non-Muslims, neither is a member of any terrorist organisation and both were "radicalised" by reading exaggerated scare stories on the internet about how evil Muslims or Westerners are, depending on their point of view.

You excuse the actions of the white man because you believe they are justified by Muslim atrocities, whereas Islamic extremists excuse the actions of Muslim terrorists because they believe they are justified by Western atrocities.

There is no difference.

I abhor terrorism in all its forms. The fact or belief that there is a war is no excuse. If you kill non-combatants, or mainly kill non-combatants, to spread fear you are a terrorist. That includes a right wing extremist murdering an MP in the UK in the run up to the Brexit vote, Islamic extremists bombing public transport, much of the violence in the Troubles in Northern Ireland and the Basque separatists. It also includes the twentieth century bombings of Guernica, London, Dresden and Hiroshima.

It doesn't matter how much you believe in your cause, when you kill or maim the public to make a partisan or political point or to terrify a population into capitulation you are a terrorist.

You'll have to provide a link to the whacko being a right wing extremist. I haven't seen that in any news. Or is it just your cartoon projection?

And that's really your criticism of what I posted?

No, I'm sure he was a humus-eating eco-friendly pacifiist who loves all the human family no matter where they are from or what lifestyle or religion they choose. My postulation was clearly a hypothetical. It's a fairly straightforward concept as two attacks are never the exactly the same.

We don't know exactly what either of the recent Islamist extremist van drivers shouted as they carried out their attacks. We also do not yet know the exact nature of the complex, twisted, fucked-up shit that was going on in the latest attacker's head, but no-one here thinks he was just a regular guy who just got a bit upset. He tried to kill as many innocent people, who he did not know, as possible. He also drove right across the country to do it. All this and you quibble with me on the detail of how we define such a man?

Of all the things I thought people might pick me up on, I really did not believe it would be this!

I was wrong - this site still has the capacity to surprise me every so often.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: longwayhome

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: longwayhome

So Greta, explain the difference to me between a lone wolf white right wing extremist mowing mainly Muslims down shouting "I want to kill all Muslims" and a lone wolf Islamist extremist mowing down mainly white people shouting "Death to the Infidels"?

Just to make the question easier neither cares much if they hit the people not intended as their target because they do it on a pavement where they could catch Muslims and non-Muslims, neither is a member of any terrorist organisation and both were "radicalised" by reading exaggerated scare stories on the internet about how evil Muslims or Westerners are, depending on their point of view.

You excuse the actions of the white man because you believe they are justified by Muslim atrocities, whereas Islamic extremists excuse the actions of Muslim terrorists because they believe they are justified by Western atrocities.

There is no difference.

I abhor terrorism in all its forms. The fact or belief that there is a war is no excuse. If you kill non-combatants, or mainly kill non-combatants, to spread fear you are a terrorist. That includes a right wing extremist murdering an MP in the UK in the run up to the Brexit vote, Islamic extremists bombing public transport, much of the violence in the Troubles in Northern Ireland and the Basque separatists. It also includes the twentieth century bombings of Guernica, London, Dresden and Hiroshima.

It doesn't matter how much you believe in your cause, when you kill or maim the public to make a partisan or political point or to terrify a population into capitulation you are a terrorist.

You'll have to provide a link to the whacko being a right wing extremist. I haven't seen that in any news. Or is it just your cartoon projection?

And that's really your criticism of what I posted?

No, I'm sure he was a humus-eating eco-friendly pacifiist who loves all the human family no matter where they are from or what lifestyle or religion they choose. My postulation was clearly a hypothetical. It's a fairly straightforward concept as two attacks are never the exactly the same.

We don't know exactly what either of the recent Islamist extremist van drivers shouted as they carried out their attacks. We also do not yet know the exact nature of the complex, twisted, fucked-up shit that was going on in the latest attacker's head, but no-one here thinks he was just a regular guy who just got a bit upset. He tried to kill as many innocent people, who he did not know, as possible. He also drove right across the country to do it. All this and you quibble with me on the detail of how we define such a man?

Of all the things I thought people might pick me up on, I really did not believe it would be this!

I was wrong - this site still has the capacity to surprise me every so often.

The guy that shot up the congressional ball practice was a left wing wing nut yet you suppose this was a right wing wing nut. You based your entire argument on facts to which you apparently know nothing. The rest was your fantasy projections. Should I have pointed out each fantasy statement you made? What more would you have me see in your fallacious argument?

quote:

ORIGINAL: longwayhome
I'm not sure what you are objecting to here.

quote:

ORIGINAL: longwayhome

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: longwayhome

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: longwayhome

So Greta, explain the difference to me between a lone wolf white right wing extremist mowing mainly Muslims down shouting "I want to kill all Muslims" and a lone wolf Islamist extremist mowing down mainly white people shouting "Death to the Infidels"?

Just to make the question easier neither cares much if they hit the people not intended as their target because they do it on a pavement where they could catch Muslims and non-Muslims, neither is a member of any terrorist organisation and both were "radicalised" by reading exaggerated scare stories on the internet about how evil Muslims or Westerners are, depending on their point of view.

You excuse the actions of the white man because you believe they are justified by Muslim atrocities, whereas Islamic extremists excuse the actions of Muslim terrorists because they believe they are justified by Western atrocities.

There is no difference.

I abhor terrorism in all its forms. The fact or belief that there is a war is no excuse. If you kill non-combatants, or mainly kill non-combatants, to spread fear you are a terrorist. That includes a right wing extremist murdering an MP in the UK in the run up to the Brexit vote, Islamic extremists bombing public transport, much of the violence in the Troubles in Northern Ireland and the Basque separatists. It also includes the twentieth century bombings of Guernica, London, Dresden and Hiroshima.

It doesn't matter how much you believe in your cause, when you kill or maim the public to make a partisan or political point or to terrify a population into capitulation you are a terrorist.

You'll have to provide a link to the whacko being a right wing extremist. I haven't seen that in any news. Or is it just your cartoon projection?

And that's really your criticism of what I posted?

No, I'm sure he was a humus-eating eco-friendly pacifiist who loves all the human family no matter where they are from or what lifestyle or religion they choose. My postulation was clearly a hypothetical. It's a fairly straightforward concept as two attacks are never the exactly the same.

We don't know exactly what either of the recent Islamist extremist van drivers shouted as they carried out their attacks. We also do not yet know the exact nature of the complex, twisted, fucked-up shit that was going on in the latest attacker's head, but no-one here thinks he was just a regular guy who just got a bit upset. He tried to kill as many innocent people, who he did not know, as possible. He also drove right across the country to do it. All this and you quibble with me on the detail of how we define such a man?

Of all the things I thought people might pick me up on, I really did not believe it would be this!

I was wrong - this site still has the capacity to surprise me every so often.

The guy that shot up the congressional ball practice was a left wing wing nut yet you suppose this was a right wing wing nut. You based your entire argument on facts to which you apparently know nothing. The rest was your fantasy projections. Should I have pointed out each fantasy statement you made? What more would you have me see in your fallacious argument?

I'll have no part in excusing what this man did.

I'm not sure what you are objecting to here. Someone who tries to attack and kill a specific ethnic group is usually described as a right wing extremist. The police have released figures on how many "domestic" extremists with violent views on race and religion they are tracking (quite separately from Islamic extremists) as they believe that this latest attack fits into that pattern.

The fact that he clearly had some extreme prejudices does not reflect on anyone else with right wing views. Our right wing prime minister described this as a "terror attack" and "every bit as sickening" as other recent attacks. There is a big difference between advocating a strong immigration policy and getting into a van and trying to kill as many innocent people as possible. Just a there is a big difference between being a Muslim and bombing ordinary people on public transport.

This sort of attack is exactly what ISIS and other Islamic extremists want. The pretence that this is a war in which both sides are doing what they have to do to win, instead of what it really is - an attack on all of our communities by people who are happy to rip apart families and end lives just to make a statement.

This type of attack is not justified in any way - even if you want to quibble with the exact description of this latest attacker.

quote:

ORIGINAL: WickedsDesire

Finsbury Park Mosque: 'Several hurt' as van hits pedestrians

A van has struck pedestrians near Finsbury Park Mosque in north London "leaving a number of casualties", police said.

One person was arrested following the incident on Seven Sisters Road.

Officers were called at 00.20 BST and remain at the scene, the Metropolitan Police said, describing it as a "major incident".

The Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) said a van "intentionally" ran over people.
Witnesses said the area was busy because worshippers had been attending evening prayers.
London Ambulance Service said it had sent "a number of resources" to the scene.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji
Yet I've seen no evidence in the news that this was in any way politically motivated. I asked you if you have seen such news and to provide a link is all.

quote:

ORIGINAL: longwayhome

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji
Yet I've seen no evidence in the news that this was in any way politically motivated. I asked you if you have seen such news and to provide a link is all.

I would refer you to WhoreMods very sensible answer in post 133.

This man was clearly Islamophobic (generally considered to be an extreme right wing sentiment) and was kicked out of a local pub the night before for shouting hatred against Muslims. You can read a number of articles in both left and right wing press in the UK since the attack which discuss the response to right wing extremism and Islamophobia, referring to the attacker. (Try the Guardian, The Sun, the BBC website just for starters)

There is no detailed exposition of the attacker's political philosophy as this is not available yet but, if you try to kill just one group of people in this way, it is a political act whatever your formal political affiliations.

Suffice it to say the UK press (and public) have no problems with considering this a right-wing Islamophobic attack born out of some misguided notion of revenge. There is no serious press here which suggests this was not Islamophobic terrorism. If you don't believe that Islamophobia is a political position, you have a different view of what is political to most people.

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

Catholic. The way Greta's talking, he's obviously Frank Castle.
I wonder if his van is black with a big white skull on the side of it...

quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75

You guys should watch the documentary, "Terrorist in Asia" and see how they work. And their motivations is completely due to their faith to Islam. It has quite a thorough documentary on Islamic Terrorist borne out of Australia too.

The sad thing is, most of these people are doctors, lawyers, good jobs, spoilt and good life middle class children. Not out of poverty or anything like that.

But simply because they started studying their Islamic faith more deeply and realise that ISIS is right in what they are doing.