Attack outside UK Houses Of Parliament — No speculation — Read 1st post

Depp · 25-03-2017 09:25PM

Widdershins wrote: »

Did you not bother to watch the BBC documentary someone posted about sharia law in britain? It's just more comfortable to take the reassuring anecdote of a boards poster, I suppose.
It was stated a number of times that capital and corporal punishment aren't part of british sharia law. Any insinuations are a product of a suspicious mind.

Sharia ''councils'' are issuing countless extralegal and often illegal community enforced marriage certificates with a man having multiple brides that are often underage and that are next to impossible for the woman/children to leave were the marriage to become abusive but I guess if people are ok with bigamy and Men marrying underage girls keep making excuses for it and downplaying it...

Depp · 25-03-2017 09:27PM

bubblypop wrote: »

I watched it.
If Muslim's wish to go to spiritual leaders for advise etc then that is their choice.
I don't see how or even why we would try to stop them?
It's no different to what went on here for years until recently.

I'm atheist, I think all religions are Bollix tbh with you, but if someone wants to practice their religion, then it's their right, and I'll defend their right.

we're not arguing to stop them altogether, just think a woman should be able to leave an abusive marriage without having to renounce her faith or be shunned by the community she was raised in!

25-03-2017 09:27PM

Depp wrote: »

Sharia ''councils'' are issuing countless extralegal and often illegal community enforced marriage certificates with a man having multiple brides that are often underage and that are next to impossible for the woman/children to leave were the marriage to become abusive but I guess if people are ok with bigamy and Men marrying underage girls keep making excuses for it and downplaying it...

There are British laws that cover this. If a Muslim or anyone else for that matter commits bigamy or marries an underage girl, then they can be dealt with according to the law.
Sharia courts don't run the land.

Professor Moriarty · 25-03-2017 09:28PM

Widdershins wrote: »

The western army involved is responsible for that example of a death, yes. Nobody here is justifying or condoning that, by the way.

The terrorists behaviour in their own country demonstrates that they are not crusaders against western bombs killing civilian casualties. They are first and foremost terrorists,genocidal, mass murderers, rapists et. cetera. You are going down the ''one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter route'' and to do this you are claiming the entire history and catalogue of brutality of the 42 isis affiliated groups is ''not relevant'' because it doesn't suit the way you want to portray them.

I'm afraid you're jumping to conclusions all over the place here.

''one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter route'?

Can you quote me where I said that? Or anything like it?

to do this you are claiming the entire history and catalogue of brutality of the 42 isis affiliated groups is ''not relevant''

Can you quote where I claimed any of this?

"because it doesn't suit the way you want to portray them."

We're back to the old mind reading stuff. Please do tell me, how do I want to portray these groups? Feel free to quote any post of mine where I portray these groups in any way good, bad or indifferent (my advice would be not to bother trying to find any but feel free anyway).

Depp · 25-03-2017 09:31PM

bubblypop wrote: »

There are British laws that cover this. If a Muslim or anyone else for that matter commits bigamy or marries an underage girl, then they can be dealt with according to the law.
Sharia courts don't run the land.

britsh law may cover this but they are not being enforced. councils and mosques are signing off on marriages like this day in day out and there are countless documentaries and reports that show this. Sharia law may not run the land but it runs certain communities

Professor Moriarty · 25-03-2017 09:33PM

Depp wrote: »

Look sorry for being short with you but these are the stated goals of isis. Its them vs everyone else and pulling out of the middle east wont make the problem go away. Now don't take this as me condoning carpet bombing of civilians the way its being done at the minute is all wrong imo. It should be boots on the ground fighting alongside iraqi and syrians and helping them knock back isis and retake the strongholds theyve taken.

No worries. I agree that boots on the ground would be infinitely preferable but US politicians don't like seeing coffins draped with the Stars and Stripes on airport runways. Much easier to bomb the sh1t out of them from a safe distance. The collateral damage is unfortunate but they won't lose votes because of it.

Widdershins · 25-03-2017 09:34PM

Depp wrote: »

why is this? because they are savages unable to self govern and they need a strong arm dictator to keep them in check? the problem in the middle east isnt american intervention and it isnt the population. Its evil men with a militant interpretation of islam using the faith and the faithful to further their own evil goals and grey areas in the quran which make this a perfectly literal interpretation.

I think you've hit the nail on the head there. There's an undercurrent of the racism of low expectations running through some of these debates.

bubblypop wrote: »

I watched it.
If Muslim's wish to go to spiritual leaders for advise etc then that is their choice.
I don't see how or even why we would try to stop them?
It's no different to what went on here for years until recently.

I'm atheist, I think all religions are Bollix tbh with you, but if someone wants to practice their religion, then it's their right, and I'll defend their right.

Fair play to you bubblypop, reframe what often amounts to abusive situations where women are left peniless and children are disinherited and defend the right to do that to them. Hats off to you.

Depp wrote: »

britsh law may cover this but they are not being enforced. councils and mosques are signing off on marriages like this day in day out and there are countless documentaries and reports that show this. Sharia law may not run the land but it runs certain communities

Quite. The protocol is to portray it as a quaint custom though.

25-03-2017 09:34PM

Depp wrote: »

we're not arguing to stop them altogether, just think a woman should be able to leave an abusive marriage without having to renounce her faith or be shunned by the community she was raised in!

I totally agree, however that's the thinking in that religion at this time.
It was the thinking in this country in the Roman Catholic religion for a long time. People told my mother she shouldn't divorce her husband because of the children, and they treated her differently afterwards.
The situation is very similar in traveler communities. Wives in abusive marriages very rarely leave for good. They can be shunned by other travellers.
Thankfully the situation is changing. It has changed here.
Women in the Muslim community need education and access to the right resources to help them.

I actually know a Muslim woman on her third marriage! I honestly didn't realise they could, but there you go. And she lives in Saudi

jackofalltrades · 25-03-2017 09:37PM

bubblypop wrote: »

True, they obviously don't have the knowledge nor the munitions to cause widespread destruction. Instead they rely on everyday objects.
I don't understand why Irish people think that any of these attacks are worse or different then what happened in these islands for 30 years.
And I'm not referring to the ideologies, just the actions.

Yes but it's the ideologies that are the reason for the fear.
During the troubles there was always the hope that things could be worked out through negotiation.
When it comes to Islamist terrorism though there's no middle ground.
They want to see the end of our way of life.

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

If the West drops a bomb and kills a child then the West is responsible for that child's death.

I think this is part of the problem as well.
Blaming "the West" is as bad a blaming Muslims.
It's grouping everyone into one big group and creating an overly-simplistic us V them scenario.
Ireland never bombed any Muslim country yet we are still considered at target for being part of "the West".

Widdershins · 25-03-2017 09:37PM

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

I'm afraid you're jumping to conclusions all over the place here.

''one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter route'?

Can you quote me where I said that? Or anything like it?

to do this you are claiming the entire history and catalogue of brutality of the 42 isis affiliated groups is ''not relevant''

Can you quote where I claimed any of this?

"because it doesn't suit the way you want to portray them."

We're back to the old mind reading stuff. Please do tell me, how do I want to portray these groups? Feel free to quote any post of mine where I portray these groups in any way good, bad or indifferent (my advice would be not to bother trying to find any but feel free anyway).

Each of the posts I responded to were portrayals of terrorism as a reaction to men seeing people bombed by ''the West'' and a claim that their terrorist activities toward people unconnected to the West were irrelevant.

Professor Moriarty · 25-03-2017 09:40PM

Widdershins wrote: »

Each of the posts I responded to were portrayals of terrorism as a reaction to men seeing people bombed by ''the West'' and a claim that their terrorist activities toward people unconnected to the West were irrelevant.

So no actual quotes where I said any of the stuff that you claimed I said?

25-03-2017 09:40PM

Widdershins wrote: »

I think you've hit the nail on the head there. There's an undercurrent of the racism of low expectations running through some of these debates

Fair play to you bubblypop, reframe what often amounts to abusive situations where women are left peniless and children are disinherited and defend the right to do that to them. Hats off to you.
.

You seem to have a very low expectation of women when you just take it for granted that they cannot or do not stand up for themselves.
Plenty actually do and I'm sure as time moves on, more women, particularly those in the west will stand up for themselves.
In the meantime, there are systems in place to help abused women &children.
Real laws also, to prosecute abusers.

Depp · 25-03-2017 09:43PM

bubblypop wrote: »

I totally agree, however that's the thinking in that religion at this time.
It was the thinking in this country in the Roman Catholic religion for a long time. People told my mother she shouldn't divorce her husband because of the children, and they treated her differently afterwards.
The situation is very similar in traveler communities. Wives in abusive marriages very rarely leave for good. They can be shunned by other travellers.
Thankfully the situation is changing. It has changed here.
Women in the Muslim community need education and access to the right resources to help them.

I actually know a Muslim woman on her third marriage! I honestly didn't realise they could, but there you go. And she lives in Saudi

This exactly, the solution is not ban everything but teach and protect these women and to protect people who speak out against these practices and stop silencing people by branding them racists or islamophobes.

I shudder to think what modern Ireland would be like had the catholic church had access to the term catholophobia with the same gravity islamophobia has today 20 or 30 years ago!

Professor Moriarty · 25-03-2017 09:44PM

jackofalltrades wrote: »

Yes but it's the ideologies that are the reason for the fear.
During the troubles there was always the hope that things could be worked out through negotiation.
When it comes to Islamist terrorism though there's no middle ground.
They want to see the end of our way of life.

I think this is part of the problem as well.
Blaming "the West" is as bad a blaming Muslims.
It's grouping everyone into one big group and creating an overly-simplistic us V them scenario.
Ireland never bombed any Muslim country yet we are still considered at target for being part of "the West".

What about all of those rendition flights that stopped off at Shannon?

25-03-2017 09:45PM

Widdershins wrote: »

Each of the posts I responded to were portrayals of terrorism as a reaction to men seeing people bombed by ''the West'' and a claim that their terrorist activities toward people unconnected to the West were irrelevant.

I don't know if anyone recalls, but this interview was in 2003, this was Khalid Kelly and Anjem Choudary on Pat Kenny some 14 years ago. 9/11 was discussed in this interview, these people did not condemn the attack..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLF76rBfOOE

The point I'm making with regards to this "us" and "them", it's not about continents, Khalid Kelly was born in Ireland it's a radical view that some people take literally, he allegedly died in a suicide attack in 2016.

Depp · 25-03-2017 09:46PM

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

What about all of those rendition flights that stopped off at Shannon?

our government allowing planes to refuel in one of our airports should in no way makes the Irish public accountable or subject to retribution

Professor Moriarty · 25-03-2017 09:50PM

Depp wrote: »

our government allowing planes to refuel in one of our airports should in no way makes the Irish public accountable or subject to retribution

Well, perspective is everything. That is how suspected al Qaeda members were brought to the US. Ireland facilitated their transportation. You might not think that this qualifies Ireland to be a target but in the minds of al Qaeda members it may well do.

Depp · 25-03-2017 09:51PM

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

No worries. I agree that boots on the ground would be infinitely preferable but US politicians don't like seeing coffins draped with the Stars and Stripes on airport runways. Much easier to bomb the sh1t out of them from a safe distance. The collateral damage is unfortunate but they won't lose votes because of it.

Its definitely not the most palateable option but boots on the ground seems like the only effective way forward if they actually want to knock isis back. What they are doing at the minute is a waste of time frankly.

25-03-2017 09:51PM

Can anyone link a source where a terrorist committed a suicide bombing because of "atrocities" committed by the West?

It usually seems to be to the tune of - god is.., disbelievers, sharia law..

Widdershins · 25-03-2017 09:53PM

bubblypop wrote: »

You seem to have a very low expectation of women when you just take it for granted that they cannot or do not stand up for themselves.
Plenty actually do and I'm sure as time moves on, more women, particularly those in the west will stand up for themselves.
In the meantime, there are systems in place to help abused women &children.
Real laws also, to prosecute abusers.

I am a woman. A lot of women are trapped in abusive situations and standing up for themselves doesn't get them out of them. The real laws are of no use when the womens community and family adhere to sharia law. It must be even harder for her to break away from abuse in that situation, at least in mainstream society it is normal to deal with ''real laws''.

Professor Moriarty · 25-03-2017 09:54PM

Depp wrote: »

Its definitely not the most palateable option but boots on the ground seems like the only effective way forward if they actually want to knock isis back. What they are doing at the minute is a waste of time frankly.

It is. And not to labour my point but the 'collateral damage' is PR gold for Isis.

Widdershins · 25-03-2017 09:55PM

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

So no actual quotes where I said any of the stuff that you claimed I said?

Yes, literally, the posts I replied to. I didn't claim you said ''one man's terrorist..'' I said your attitude is going down that route, as evidenced by your posts. Claiming to not ave expressed or to even hold definite views is a bit hard to believe when you've clearly expressed what you did.

Professor Moriarty · 25-03-2017 09:56PM

222233 wrote: »

Can anyone link a source where a terrorist committed a suicide bombing because of "atrocities" committed by the West?

It usually seems to be to the tune of - god is.., disbelievers, sharia law..

Infidels killing Islamic women and children requires martyrs to defend them and Islam.

25-03-2017 09:56PM

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Infidels killing Islamic women and children requires martyrs to defend them and Islam.

What about non infidels doing same?

Widdershins · 25-03-2017 09:58PM

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Infidels killing Islamic women and children requires martyrs to defend them and Islam.

Using them as human shields is defending them?

Professor Moriarty · 25-03-2017 09:58PM

Widdershins wrote: »

Yes, literally, the posts I replied to. I didn't claim you said ''one man's terrorist..'' I said your attitude is going down that route, as evidenced by your posts. Claiming to not ave expressed or to even hold definite views is a bit hard to believe when you've clearly expressed what you did.

So, still no quotes to back up anything you claimed I said? Surely if I've "clearly expressed what I did" then you'd be able to quote me?

Professor Moriarty · 25-03-2017 09:59PM

Widdershins wrote: »

Using them as human shields is defending them?

What do you think?

Depp · 25-03-2017 10:00PM

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

It is. And not to labour my point but the 'collateral damage' is PR gold for Isis.

Agree with this it definitely helps them but I dont think that losing it would hurt them that much.

25-03-2017 10:00PM

Widdershins wrote: »

I am a woman. A lot of women are trapped in abusive situations and standing up for themselves doesn't get them out of them. The real laws are of no use when the womens community and family adhere to sharia law. It must be even harder for her to break away from abuse in that situation, at least in mainstream society it is normal to deal with ''real laws''.

But, you must agree that the same thing happens in our society. The same thing happens in traveller society.
It's hard for every woman in that situation.
Muslim women living in Ireland or the UK for example have a much easier way out then abused women in Muslim countries, where Sharia courts actually exist.
There are systems in place here, Muslim women just need education & help accessing them.

I think that me & you actually believe many of the same things, we just see it from different angles.
Just because someone else practises a religion better suited to the dark ages, does not mean we can drag them kicking & screaming into the 21st century. That's their choice

Professor Moriarty · 25-03-2017 10:01PM

222233 wrote: »

What about non infidels doing same?

Assuming that the women are innocent civilians, I would consider those deaths to be murder. What do you think?

Attack outside UK Houses Of Parliament — No speculation — Read 1st post

Comments