Muslims.......

[ArseHats]

Fretless - Then why are they being trained and encouraged by *some* Immans in *some* Mosques.

Please define "some" in percentage terms. 0.0001%...? 99.9999?

Perhaps you should read the two threads before you try misplaced sarcasm. No one knows, obviously, that is the point. The security service probably know about lots, but it is the others who are not seen who create the surprises. As I said, a family or a son disappears off to Syria, no one in his family or local Mosque knows anything about it. So he / they did it all in isolation, no one in the community encouraged them, yeh pull the other bloody one.

One possibility is that parents and local Imams are encouraging / covering up plans of their young people to join I.S. / plan terrorist attacks. Another possibility is that some / most radicalisation occurs in on-line communities on laptop and desktop screens, away from potentially tempering eyes. Young humans are generally not especially keen to report their own behaviour and planned behaviour to their parents or local establishment figures.

[Dr Bunsen Honeydew]

Whole families

[ArseHats]

Yes but we have largely grown out of it, they haven't. Once again it has all been covered in past posts in the thread. Read the thread about the Paris attacks as well.

The main point of this and that discussion is no religion - no problem.

I suspect many Muslims would suggest that they have "grown out of it". Some people might suggest that some "Christians" and/or "Westerners" haven't.

Re. the Paris attacks, it's never been right to call those terrorists "Islamic State" - their defining characteristics are neither Islam nor statehood. They have never deserved those badges, which are much more nuanced. I would rather call that mob what they are: a psychopathic cult.

I agree that "religion" is an unhelpful perpetuator / institutionaliser of divison, but really the human instinct for "in-group - out-group" social categorisation is as powerful as are the human instincts for high calorie food or sex. Religion is a sympton of this "in-group - out-group" social instinct, not a cause. Humanitariansim (ie a classification of all of humanity as the "in-group") appeals to many as an antedote to this. But there remain plenty of world-views that run contrary to humanitarianism - including the psychopathy of I.S., but to a much lesser extent there are also the sorts of muslim-sceptic (to put it as politely as I am willing) sentiments one picks up on any internet forum...

[brit-pop]

I'm at a loss as to what this thread is even doing on HFS. Jammy has an opinion on something, so fuckin what. Does that mean he gets to air it here? I come here for conversation about hifi and music. If I want opinion then I'll check my Facebook feed.

Jammy, you'd have more fun over at the guardian website. In the same way I sometimes post on the Daily Heil and Conservative Home sites.

[zebbo]

Brit, the one thing we have left, at the moment at least, just, is freedom of speech. If Jammy, or anyone else has an opinion, he is perfectly entitled to air it. Whether you agree with it or not is immaterial, whether you respond to it is up to you.

[Daniel Quinn]

thing is jammy is not expressing an opinion just a load of incoherent illogical nonsense born out of a sense of anger,frustration and incorrect assumptions.

additionally it is silly to blame religion . religions are ultimately ideas. man makes sense of his material conditions through ideology. If you take away religion other ideas will fill the vacuum. All ideologies are capable of begiting violence .Most ideologies distinguish between believers and none believers.

additionally, if you disturb the balance of a foreign territory don't be surprised if they come back to haunt you. 750,000 innocent Muslims have been killed by allied troops in the name of peace.

[Dr Bunsen Honeydew]

But so is a lot of reaction to this, in fact the majority is emotional and prejudiced and not completely thought out. I hope we represent all the aspects of peeps here so Jammy has a right to say and you have right to criticise.

[Daniel Quinn]

jammy is allowed to say what he wants within the law.

The legal status of jammys opinion is questionable. However whether hs should facilitate jammys free speech is a different question.

[Dr Bunsen Honeydew]

Then the law is wrong if he cannot say what he feels. We have discussed this before, there should be no restriction on people words or opinions, it is censorship. Look how often the protected minorities can say what they like about the majority, it is biased. Words never hurt anyone, but as an incitement or call to action then THAT is what should be illegal. "I hate Muslims because of what happened in Paris" is a normal human (over) reaction and of course is a misplaced generalisation, but it is normal. "I hate Muslims lets go and burn down Mosques" is rightly illegal. Same as "I hate non Muslims and I want to cut their heads off". We have *a right* to hate the same as we have a right to love, it is just yin and yang.

[Ithilstone]

Then the law is wrong if he cannot say what he feels. We have discussed this before, there should be no restriction on people words or opinions, it is censorship. Look how often the protected minorities can say what they like about the majority, it is biased. Words never hurt anyone, but as an incitement or call to action then THAT is what should be illegal. "I hate Muslims because of what happened in Paris" is a normal human (over) reaction and of course is a misplaced generalisation, but it is normal. "I hate Muslims lets go and burn down Mosques" is rightly illegal. Same as "I hate non Muslims and I want to cut their heads off". We have *a right* to hate the same as we have a right to love, it is just yin and yang.

+1