Religion and terrorism

PoleStar

A quote on a previous thread caught my attentions:

"......not all Muslims are terrorists but all terrorists are Muslims"

And for those who hadn't read the previous thread, please note this was an American quote and referring to opinion on the States only.

However, it got me thinking about religion and terrorism in the 21st century. I know we all have examples of the Christian crusades etc but what about in recent times, say the 21st century and latter parts of the 20th century, which terrorists are committing crimes in the names of which religions?

Perhaps I can start with the troubles in the North of Ireland, although many would say that they are more politically motivated rather than religious based per se, and I refer to both sides of that "war".

This was prompted by personal observation that most people I have met associate the majority of terrorism with religion, and in particular, Islam. Please note these are not my personal opinions and I do recognise that most religions are fairly similar in promoting peace and tolerance however I just want to see what others think.

InFront

which terrorists are committing crimes in the names of which religions?

The most obvious and most likely threat to a random set of people at a general point in the western world under the category of terrorism comes (without considering the triggering phase of the system) from Muslim extremists.

Why do you need an opinion on this? It isn't a question of opinion.

Sam Vimes

PoleStar wrote:

"......not all Muslims are terrorists but all terrorists are Muslims"

that's a fairly retarded thing to say. the ira, eta and the kkk pop into mind immediately

PoleStar

Commander its obvious to me you didnt read all of my post.

Please read it again and you will see that

a) the quote was made by someone else

b) that it was referring to the United States

Thus I can't really see the point of your post, I was just using it as an opening line.

PoleStar

Commander Vimes wrote:

that's a fairly retarded thing to say. the ira, eta and the kkk pop into mind immediately

Also Commaner Vimes

I was talking about religion and terrorism, so just to remind you,

The IRA are political replublican terrorists and not primarily motivated by religion.

Eta are a paramilitary organisation who want self determination for the Basque region of Spain, nothing to do with religion.

And finally, the KKK are a white supremacist organisation, again motivated by race and not religion.

humanji

Well, you have the christian fundamentalists in the states who bomb abortion clinics and the like in the name of their god, and to a lesser extent (but equally disturbing) you get the likes over here, who use scare tactics to try and change peoples minds, eg the fake pregnany counciling places who basically want to force people not to abort. These aren't as violent, but just as insidious, IMO. Don't know if they qualify as terrorists, but they are using terror to get their way.

Jackie laughlin

It's important that "terrorism" is not reduced to referring simply to violence of which one disapproves. There are many attempts at defintion but scholarship on the subject is more or less agreed that terrorism is violent communication; the victims are mere message generators used to address the audience which the perpetrator has chosen.

It is true that the bulk of terrorist attacks are now Islamic. It is also true that they are innovative and efficient in their use of media.

Hobbes

Jackie laughlin wrote:

It is true that the bulk of terrorist attacks are now Islamic.

Actually if you bother to go look it up you see that is not the case. The media just focuses on Iraq/Afghanistan and whatever Bush is spouting. There are some terrorist groups being active for years and rarely get any major press.

Also most of the violence in Iraq is not terrorist related.


AFGHANISTAN
al Qaeda - Muslim fanatics.

ALGERIA
GIA - muslim fanatics
GSPC - Same as previous more or less.

CHILE
FPMR - Communists

COLOMBIA
ELN - Markists
FARC - Same as previous more or less.
AUC - Attacks insurgents.

EGYPT
Egyptian Islamic Jihad - muslim fanatics
Al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya - Same as above.

GEORGIA
Zviadists - Extremist supporters of deceased former president.

GREECE
RN - leftist group with an anti-establishment, anti-U.S., anti-NATO and anti-EU agenda.
17 November - Formed due to the killing students protesting during a CIA backed coup. (radical left)
ELA - Radicals. anti-establishment.

HONDURAS
FPM - Anti-US intervention in country.

INDIA
Al-Ummah - Radical muslims.

IRAQ
ANO - splinter group of PLO
PLF - Creation of palestinian state.
(and others reported)

ISRAEL
Kach and Kahane Chai - Jewish fanatics.

JAPAN
Aum Supreme Truth - Take over Japan then the world.
Chukaku-Ha - Anti-Western
JRA - Overthrow japanese government and bring the monarcy back.

LEBANON
Asbat al-Ansar - Overthrow government
Hezbollah - Increase political power in Lebanon and overthrow Israel.

Northern Ireland
CIRA - Reunification of Ireland.
IRA - Same as above.
LVF - Anti-Irish
OV - As last one.
RIRA - Unify Ireland.
RHD - Anti-Irish

OCCUPIED TERRITORIES
Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade - Anti-Israel
DFLP - Palestinian state through revolution.
HAMAS - Anti-Israel
PIJ - Anti-Israel

PAKISTAN
HUA - Anti-India in Kashmir
HUM - Unite Kashmir with pakistan
JEM - As the last one
LT - As the last one

Peru
Shining Path - Communist
MRTA - Marxist, anti-US anti-Japan

PHILLIPPINES
ASG - Independant Islamic state in Mindanao and Sulu
ABB - Communists
NPA - anti-Establishment

RWANDA
ALIR - Overthrow government and bring back Hutu control.
RUF - Overthrow government.

SOUTH AFRICA
PAGAD - Anti-West, establish Islamic State

SPAIN
ETA - Independant homeland. Marxist.
GRAPO - Overthrow government. Marxist.

Sri Lanka
Tamil Tigers - Independant Tamil State

Syria
PFLP - Anti-Israel
PFLP-GC - Anti-PLO, Anti-Israel

Turkey
PKK - Independant Kurdish State
DHKP - Marxist. Anti-US, Anti-NATO.

USA
Jamaat ul-Fuqra - Islamic Fanatics.
(among others reported)

UZBEKISTAN
IMU - Overthrow president, establish Islamic state.


Of course this is not the definitive list but just from that lot alone while there are quite a few Muslim fanatics they are not the majority and terrorism is not solely a Muslim issue.

Zombrex

PoleStar wrote:

The IRA are political replublican terrorists and not primarily motivated by religion.

Under that logic neither are Al Queda. Al Queda's primary motivation is that they want western crusaders out of the middle east. The way they define "western crusaders" is determined largely by religion and origin, but then so is the IRAs definition of "the true Irish" and the hatred towards Irish Protestants (which is why you get the ridiculous statements such as "go home" being shouted towards unionist famillies who have lived in Ireland for the last 400 years)

PoleStar

Wicknight said "Under that logic neither are Al Queda. Al Queda's primary motivation is that they want western crusaders out of the middle east. The way they define "western crusaders" is determined largely by religion and origin, but then so is the IRAs definition of "the true Irish" and the hatred towards Irish Protestants (which is why you get the ridiculous statements such as "go home" being shouted towards unionist famillies who have lived in Ireland for the last 400 years)"

This simply not true, Al Queda are an Islamist militant group, carrying out what they see as literal interpretation of the Qu'ran {as they see it) i.e. jihad which while in ancient times referred to personal struggle, now often is taken as "holy war". Their motivation is definitely religious.

The IRA on the other hand or not primarily relgiously motivated, again they are political.

Hobbes said "Actually if you bother to go look it up you see that is not the case. The media just focuses on Iraq/Afghanistan and whatever Bush is spouting. There are some terrorist groups being active for years and rarely get any major press"

Im not being smart Hobbes but my topic was religion and terrorism. And while I think you gave a very good picture of World terrorism, and I think you have a comprehensive list, aside from the Muslims, the other examples you gave were mainly political terrorisists. Which if you read my OP, this is why I started this thread as a previous American quote caught my attention " not all Muslims are terrorists but all terrorists are Muslims"

Hobbes

PoleStar wrote:

This simply not true, Al Queda are an Islamist militant group, carrying out what they see as literal interpretation of the Qu'ran

As I understand their demands (I looked them up) its not the case. While they are religious (in the way that IRA are predominantly Catholics) their first demand for example has nothing to do with religion. If anything it is more anti-west based on the Wests history of fuking around in the middle east.

Im not being smart Hobbes but my topic was religion and terrorism.

I was responding to Jackies comment that the majority of Terrorists in the world are Muslims. They aren't.

Hagar

I would tend to agree that religion and "terrorism" are linked.
For the zealot there is always the reward in the afterlife to look forward to, whereas your common or garden atheist is not sucked in by this promise of future rewards. Non-religious people live in the here and now and have no wish to end their existance over something as transient as politics.

Wibbs

Hobbes wrote:

As I understand their demands (I looked them up) its not the case. While they are religious (in the way that IRA are predominantly Catholics)

A comparison often trotted out, but a little different in that most of AQ pronouncements are heavily couched in Islamic iconography. AFAIR the Ra weren't quoting the catechism in their manifestos too often.

their first demand for example has nothing to do with religion. If anything it is more anti-west based on the Wests history of fuking around in the middle east.

True enough. Whole other debate there.

Hagar wrote:

Non-religious people live in the here and now and have no wish to end their existance over something as transient as politics.

How do you explain communist terrorists then? Most would be atheists.

Hagar

I've never heard of a communist "terrorist" blowing himself up. Maybe It's happened but I can't recall many of them.

vesp

PoleStar wrote:

The IRA on the other hand or not primarily relgiously motivated, again they are political.

I suppose the Republicans who went in to the little church in Darkley and machine gunned the parishoners there at random, killing some, were not religiously motivated ? And what about the many other protestant families intimidated and murdered aling the border during the troubles ? Do not claim there was extreme bigotry against Protestants from at least some Republicans in the past. I have heard too many comments and sing-songs etc to be fooled. Even the kids of many Republicans in the North were brought up to hate Protestants , lets face it.

Hobbes

Hagar wrote:

I've never heard of a communist "terrorist" blowing himself up. Maybe It's happened but I can't recall many of them.

You know you can be a terrorist without blowing yourself up. For that matter you have heard of "Proxy Bombs" ? The IRA used to do that.

Frank Grimes

Hagar wrote:

I've never heard of a communist "terrorist" blowing himself up. Maybe It's happened but I can't recall many of them.

Not quite communist but there were suicide bombers used by a Syrian socialist group in the 80s, the SSNP I think. The PKK used them too and they're a Marxist group.
Edit: The Tamil Tigers use suicide bombers too, but I don't think they're a left wing group now that I think of it.

Sam Vimes

PoleStar wrote:

Commander its obvious to me you didnt read all of my post.

Please read it again and you will see that

a) the quote was made by someone else

b) that it was referring to the United States

Thus I can't really see the point of your post, I was just using it as an opening line.

i didn't say you said it, i just said it was retarded. i was agreeing with you. and there are terrorists within the united states who aren't muslim too, e.g. timothy mc veigh

vesp

Commander Vimes wrote:

there are terrorists within the united states who aren't muslim too, e.g. timothy mc veigh

Was he not more of an odd ball nutcase rather than part of an organised terrorist group ( self called army ) like you find in other conflicts etc ?

InFront

vesp wrote:

Was he not more of an odd ball nutcase rather than part of an organised terrorist group ( self called army ) like you find in other conflicts etc ?

I for one wouldn't differentiate between an odd ball nutcase and a member of a terrorist group

Zombrex

vesp wrote:

Was he not more of an odd ball nutcase rather than part of an organised terrorist group ( self called army ) like you find in other conflicts etc ?

That is how it mostly works. The people who actually blow themselves up are normally "odd ball nutcases" manipulated into carrying out such actions by a wider movement. You won't see Bin Laden boarding a 747 any time soon.

vesp

Wicknight wrote:

That is how it mostly works. The people who actually blow themselves up are normally "odd ball nutcases" manipulated into carrying out such actions by a wider movement. You won't see Bin Laden boarding a 747 any time soon.

I agree but I was responding to the point someone made that " there are terrorists within the united states who aren't muslim too". My point is that considering the size of the country there are not many "home grown" terrorist groups active there. ( no smart comments please ).

PoleStar

I think i agree with Vesp.

And I have found many of the replies to my OP quite interesting. What I have seen of the examples of terrorists are mainly non-religious examples.

From what I gather although I may be wrong, the majority of terrorists who commit such acts in the name of a certain religion seem to be Muslim.

Please dont get me wrong, Im not anti-Muslim, and yes I know all Muslims are not terrorists. But it seems that the oddball nutcases that people have mentioned commiting terrorism in the name of religion do seem to be Muslims. And while one might say, these oddball nutcases are not "all Muslims" or do not represent Islam, what is it about Islam that allows people to commit such acts. You dont get Zen Buddhists going to Iraq and blowing themselves up? Perhaps someone might know more about this than me and elighten us......

Sand

From what I gather although I may be wrong, the majority of terrorists who commit such acts in the name of a certain religion seem to be Muslim.

Please dont get me wrong, Im not anti-Muslim, and yes I know all Muslims are not terrorists. But it seems that the oddball nutcases that people have mentioned commiting terrorism in the name of religion do seem to be Muslims. And while one might say, these oddball nutcases are not "all Muslims" or do not represent Islam, what is it about Islam that allows people to commit such acts. You dont get Zen Buddhists going to Iraq and blowing themselves up? Perhaps someone might know more about this than me and elighten us......

That the current wave of terrorism [and its important to stress current - there have been previous waves of assassinations, bombings and full blown terrorist campaigns - notably anarchist at the turn of the century, various left wing groups and nationalist groups throughout the 70s etc etc] is largely Islamic based has little to do with Islam itself.

The terrorism of Jihadist extremists is more a factor of conflict between moderate Islam/secular/liberal that is making progress in the Islamic world and the conservitive/hardline backlash or reaction to the new uncertainties that it brings. Literally a splinter group of thinkers and activists have gone through the Koran and underlined all the violent/intolerant parts and dismissed anything that contradicts that theme. You could do the same with Jewish, Christian or any religious texts.

The west and the US in particular is seen as an enemy of these people because theyre perceived as the source of moderate, liberal/secularist ideas that hardliners believe are corrupting the Islamic world. They feel the failure of the Islamic world [poverty, poor literacy, etc, etc] in its current state, compared to its dominance back in the 8th-14th centuries is down to a lack of religious fanaticism. To restore order requires the "correction" of those who have strayed from the one true path the smiting of unbelievers and so on and so forth. Its an old story of hardline religious types- "We're not doing great, clearly God is punishing us for turning our backs on him, let us U turn with a veangence!"

Theres a similar conflict in the US between hardline religous groups and hardline secularism which has polarised the countrys political scene - but where people have by and large kept it relatively peaceful apart from the odd angry loner who shoots up an abortion clinic or similar.

Jihadist terrorism may not resolve itself until the battle between conservitives and liberals in the Islamic world is resolved. There are currently a lot of angry young men in the Islamic world which bears a resemblance to the population demographics that preceded WW1 and WW2 and various nationalist conflicts in Europe. The wars between Christian fanaticism and liberalism lasted for centuries, including the very nasty 30 Years War in Germany which was littered with atrocities - hopefully it wont take 30 years for Bin Laden and his cohorts to fall out of fashion.

Sam Vimes

vesp wrote:

Was he not more of an odd ball nutcase rather than part of an organised terrorist group ( self called army ) like you find in other conflicts etc ?

you don't have to be in a group to perform acts of terrorism

PoleStar

Sand, good post and largely objective. Just 2 small points though

Sand wrote:

That the current wave of terrorism [and its important to stress current - there have been previous waves of assassinations, bombings and full blown terrorist campaigns - notably anarchist at the turn of the century, various left wing groups and nationalist groups throughout the 70s etc etc] is largely Islamic based has little to do with Islam itself.

While a valid point, it is not too relevant as this is now the 21st century and we must judge people on current opinion and customs and what s accepted now. I dont want to go back and start talking about the Christian crusades etc! I hope although I am probably wrong, that in general we are a bit more civilised and educated now than people were in those days.

Sand wrote:

Literally a splinter group of thinkers and activists have gone through the Koran and underlined all the violent/intolerant parts and dismissed anything that contradicts that theme. You could do the same with Jewish, Christian or any religious texts.

Yes I agree, the Bible in particular can be a scary book if you take it literally! However, in general Christians do not go blowing themselves up to kill innocent people in the name of the bible, whereas this does happen with Islam. And i know there are terrorist attacks on Abortion clinics etc, but still the majority of religious based terrorism is in the name of Islam.