Most murderers are lone individuals who act solely on their own impulses. This is entirely different and there is no need to explain why because I don't think you're that stupid.
Manchester Arena explosion: 22 killed in 'terror attack by suicide bomber' at concer
- Thread starter PriestTheyCalledHim
- Start date
Most murderers are lone individuals who act solely on their own impulses. This is entirely different and there is no need to explain why because I don't think you're that stupid.
swilow
Bluelight Crew
SS, your reply to me was really great, thanks for that. I think we might need to agree to disagree on some points at least. 
So, do you think the motive for murder makes some murders worse than others?
I wish Escher had trotted out gun deaths as a comparison rather than smoke detectors. Now that would have been two-pronged controversy. :D
So, do you think the motive for murder makes some murders worse than others?
I wish Escher had trotted out gun deaths as a comparison rather than smoke detectors. Now that would have been two-pronged controversy. :D
SS, your reply to me was really great, thanks for that. I think we might need to agree to disagree on some points at least.
If you want to stop on our dialogue that's cool with me, we have been going for quite awhile!
Well obviously for the individuals and families involved in murder it doesn't matter so much as the devastation is going to be the same, generally speaking. The context behind the murder in terms of its wider ramifications is important though. If it was just a heat of passion thing, one lone individual who went too far for whatever reason and it was just an isolated event, then this doesn't really connect so much with the wider community or society (unless he was well known or something). But say cartel killings for example, or gang related murders, this isn't a lone individual event and is connected to a fabric of forces that means it can happen again, and again, and again - the individuals motives may be not too dissimilar from the lone individuals heat of passion.. but the killer is not an isolated entity and is just the forefront of the menacing collective entity that inspired or subtly (or directly forced) the killing. That clearly sets it apart from the lone individuals motives and makes it a whole different scenario, requiring totally different actions on the part of law enforcement.
This terror related thing is even bigger than cartel work and more serious, because the victims have no relation to the killers at all, chosen at random at any time, and the killers are being motivated by an ideology as opposed to money, drugs or power. They are not playing by the standard "cops and robbers" protocol, and they never intend to because that is not their bag. Even the cartel people play by a certain script within the confines of our culture. These terrorists do not.. they don't just break the law, they are actively trying to subvert and destroy the entire system itself. The cartels, as much as they hate the law, need it to exist, if you see what I mean.
swilow
Bluelight Crew
Some rather interesting statistics I found. For starters, there was signigicantly more terrorism in the 1970's than now, with a similar rate as today found in the 1980's. There are a few explanations for the data of the 1970's; this coincided with the so-called 'Troubles' in Ireland, as well as the rise of communist terror groups and Palestinian speratists working in Germany. I wonder did we try to restrict immigration of either Germans or the Irish? 
It appears that in 2016, Boko Haram killed more people than ISIS, but Boko Haram do not have much of a prescence in Europe (if at all?) so we do not hear of that. For both groups, most of these deaths occurred outside Europe. I guess this tells us that ISIS are losing power (a known) and that they are more likely to attack people in the same geographical region as them. That's a touch surprising though; do we consider the deaths of Europeans to count for more than the deaths of non-Europeans?
Last year, in western Europe, something like 175 people died from terrorism. In the EU the figures for deaths via gun violence is around 6,000; even removing the majority that were self-inflicted, you've got about 1500 deaths from guns. Yet, you do not have the media and political frenzy around guns in Europe that you do around terrorism.
This suggests a few things. We value our 'own' ethnicity higher than others; this is not surprising and is likely a trait we evolved for survival, and that we judge crimes comitted upon Europeans by non-Europeans as more deleterious. It could also be related to the fact that terrorism seems to have an "obvious" solution for politicians to invent, i.e. preventing Muslim migration to the EU. However, this has been somewhat undermined by the fact that most recent terrorists have been 'homegrown'.
I'm not trying to say terrorism is not a threat to Europeans- it surely is- but I am trying to say that it is not as significant of a threat than what we are lead to believe and this needs to temper any desire to dramatically change the way Europeans live as a result. And there are multiple reasons for people believing it is a greater threat then gun violence, and even domestic violence (which again kills much more than terrorism, but you do not have right-wing groups parading for this cause).
I blame the media for whipping this up, and of course it would during this time of great upheaval for various forms of media which are rapidly becoming obsolete. And I blame various right-wing groups for inisiting that the greatest threat to Europeans is coming from outside when statistics seem to demonstrate it is Europeans who are the greatest threat to themselves.
Anyway, here are the lazy links I used; please don't ask me to confirm the quality of these sources, they were the first things Google showed me. If these statistics are wrong, they would have to be very wrong for them to be telling a significant untruth.
People killed by terrorism in western Europe from 1970 on.
More people died globally from terrorism recently than ever before, just not in Europe.
Gun violence stuff from a probably biased source.
Either way, these are worth a look, I'd be interested in anyone elses interpretation of these stats.
I just feel I've said what I wanted, anything else will just be repetition. But thanks for going to the lengths you have, I see your points (I think you see mine) and appreciate that regardless of my personal opinion of them.
It appears that in 2016, Boko Haram killed more people than ISIS, but Boko Haram do not have much of a prescence in Europe (if at all?) so we do not hear of that. For both groups, most of these deaths occurred outside Europe. I guess this tells us that ISIS are losing power (a known) and that they are more likely to attack people in the same geographical region as them. That's a touch surprising though; do we consider the deaths of Europeans to count for more than the deaths of non-Europeans?
Last year, in western Europe, something like 175 people died from terrorism. In the EU the figures for deaths via gun violence is around 6,000; even removing the majority that were self-inflicted, you've got about 1500 deaths from guns. Yet, you do not have the media and political frenzy around guns in Europe that you do around terrorism.
This suggests a few things. We value our 'own' ethnicity higher than others; this is not surprising and is likely a trait we evolved for survival, and that we judge crimes comitted upon Europeans by non-Europeans as more deleterious. It could also be related to the fact that terrorism seems to have an "obvious" solution for politicians to invent, i.e. preventing Muslim migration to the EU. However, this has been somewhat undermined by the fact that most recent terrorists have been 'homegrown'.
I'm not trying to say terrorism is not a threat to Europeans- it surely is- but I am trying to say that it is not as significant of a threat than what we are lead to believe and this needs to temper any desire to dramatically change the way Europeans live as a result. And there are multiple reasons for people believing it is a greater threat then gun violence, and even domestic violence (which again kills much more than terrorism, but you do not have right-wing groups parading for this cause).
I blame the media for whipping this up, and of course it would during this time of great upheaval for various forms of media which are rapidly becoming obsolete. And I blame various right-wing groups for inisiting that the greatest threat to Europeans is coming from outside when statistics seem to demonstrate it is Europeans who are the greatest threat to themselves.
Anyway, here are the lazy links I used; please don't ask me to confirm the quality of these sources, they were the first things Google showed me. If these statistics are wrong, they would have to be very wrong for them to be telling a significant untruth.
People killed by terrorism in western Europe from 1970 on.
More people died globally from terrorism recently than ever before, just not in Europe.
Gun violence stuff from a probably biased source.
Either way, these are worth a look, I'd be interested in anyone elses interpretation of these stats.
SS said:
I just feel I've said what I wanted, anything else will just be repetition. But thanks for going to the lengths you have, I see your points (I think you see mine) and appreciate that regardless of my personal opinion of them.
swilow
Bluelight Crew
^Yeah, fair play, but it is reactive, ISIS are calling the shots still.
Not really, don't think they were calling the shots when they were blown to pieces in air strikes.
I fully support the killing of Isis in any way.
It has to part of a multi pronged strategy.
I also fully support the building of relations with muslims in the uk.
There was a march in Manchester by hundreds of muslims showing respect and support for the victims and their families, nice to see.
I fully support the killing of Isis in any way.
It has to part of a multi pronged strategy.
I also fully support the building of relations with muslims in the uk.
There was a march in Manchester by hundreds of muslims showing respect and support for the victims and their families, nice to see.
Somerandomdude
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2016
- Messages
- 278
Some rather interesting statistics I found. For starters, there was signigicantly more terrorism in the 1970's than now, with a similar rate as today found in the 1980's. There are a few explanations for the data of the 1970's; this coincided with the so-called 'Troubles' in Ireland, as well as the rise of communist terror groups and Palestinian speratists working in Germany. I wonder did we try to restrict immigration of either Germans or the Irish?
It appears that in 2016, Boko Haram killed more people than ISIS, but Boko Haram do not have much of a prescence in Europe (if at all?) so we do not hear of that. For both groups, most of these deaths occurred outside Europe. I guess this tells us that ISIS are losing power (a known) and that they are more likely to attack people in the same geographical region as them. That's a touch surprising though; do we consider the deaths of Europeans to count for more than the deaths of non-Europeans?
Last year, in western Europe, something like 175 people died from terrorism. In the EU the figures for deaths via gun violence is around 6,000; even removing the majority that were self-inflicted, you've got about 1500 deaths from guns. Yet, you do not have the media and political frenzy around guns in Europe that you do around terrorism.
This suggests a few things. We value our 'own' ethnicity higher than others; this is not surprising and is likely a trait we evolved for survival, and that we judge crimes comitted upon Europeans by non-Europeans as more deleterious. It could also be related to the fact that terrorism seems to have an "obvious" solution for politicians to invent, i.e. preventing Muslim migration to the EU. However, this has been somewhat undermined by the fact that most recent terrorists have been 'homegrown'.
I'm not trying to say terrorism is not a threat to Europeans- it surely is- but I am trying to say that it is not as significant of a threat than what we are lead to believe and this needs to temper any desire to dramatically change the way Europeans live as a result. And there are multiple reasons for people believing it is a greater threat then gun violence, and even domestic violence (which again kills much more than terrorism, but you do not have right-wing groups parading for this cause).
I blame the media for whipping this up, and of course it would during this time of great upheaval for various forms of media which are rapidly becoming obsolete. And I blame various right-wing groups for inisiting that the greatest threat to Europeans is coming from outside when statistics seem to demonstrate it is Europeans who are the greatest threat to themselves.
Anyway, here are the lazy links I used; please don't ask me to confirm the quality of these sources, they were the first things Google showed me. If these statistics are wrong, they would have to be very wrong for them to be telling a significant untruth.
People killed by terrorism in western Europe from 1970 on.
More people died globally from terrorism recently than ever before, just not in Europe.
Gun violence stuff from a probably biased source.
Either way, these are worth a look, I'd be interested in anyone elses interpretation of these stats.
I just feel I've said what I wanted, anything else will just be repetition. But thanks for going to the lengths you have, I see your points (I think you see mine) and appreciate that regardless of my personal opinion of them.
You're ignoring the fundamental thing that makes Islamism different + more dangerous than all those things you mentioned- the fact that it is an ideology that seeks to supersede the laws of the land. An ideology that commands death to the infidel. An ideology that can grow and fester in immigrant communities that are insulated and far removed from wider society. This is exacerbated by continued high levels of immigration.
You blame the media for 'whipping this up'? Are you out of your mind? The mainstream media has been going above and beyond to obfuscate the theological underpinnings of what these terrorists do. They use language that is as neutral and vague as possible when describing an attack, the identity of the attacker etc.. They never speculate about motivation until the information about identity etc has reached everyone and when they do so its always in vague terms.
They even go out of their way to massively spread things like the image of the dark skinned man wearing a turban offering free taxi rides in the aftermath of the attack, because he looks stereotypically 'muslim'. Ironically for people who claim to be so 'progressive' and in touch with minorities, they were too dumb to realise he was obviously a Sikh, as Muslims seldom if ever wear turbans.
Reading posts by people like you honestly makes me feel as if we live in 2 different realities. Its crazy.
swilow
Bluelight Crew
^You forgot where I also blame racism too. I presented some statistics, you focus on one bit. Whatever, I skim read your posts too.
Everything you are saying has been said by countless other alt-right folks, its tired and unoriginal and I've little need or desire to bother refuting it.
Everything you are saying has been said by countless other alt-right folks, its tired and unoriginal and I've little need or desire to bother refuting it.
I know you were addressing someone else, but I'm curious to know where you'd place me on the political spectrum now that I've expanded a little on some of the points.
swilow
Bluelight Crew
^Straight up commie
I'm sorry to inform you, my British friends, but this is only the beginning. Things will only get worse from here. You had the chance to save your country, and opted for the ignorant route; you opted to allow dangerous refugees and migrants to freely enter your country, bringing with them their poisonous, barbaric, uncivilized ideology.
The terrorist attacks will only increase.
The pedophile and underage sex rings will only increase.
Demands for Sharia law will only increase.
In no more than three generation's time, your once-proud nation will be indistinguishable from the war-torn Middle East.
The only thing he's wrong about is the nation. America has smartened up, and have elected leaders which will prevent the U.S. from becoming the Middle East. Replace America with the U.K., and he's spot on.
The terrorist attacks will only increase.
The pedophile and underage sex rings will only increase.
Demands for Sharia law will only increase.
In no more than three generation's time, your once-proud nation will be indistinguishable from the war-torn Middle East.
The only thing he's wrong about is the nation. America has smartened up, and have elected leaders which will prevent the U.S. from becoming the Middle East. Replace America with the U.K., and he's spot on.
swilow
Bluelight Crew
^You're wasting your prescient talent on Bluelight mate, get out there and win the lottery.
That was sarcasm.![:\](https://bluelight.org/xf/BL_Images/Orig_Emoji/wrygrin.gif "wry grin :\")
That was sarcasm.
Escher's Waterfall
Bluelight Crew
I think smoke detectors make a better comparison because, for the most part, it's not politically charged. This week in the US, we could expect an average of 50 people died in house fires - about 3,000 a year.
But while we have some common-sense regulations that are improving things (such as mandating AFCI outlets in bedrooms in new constructions, etc), we don't decide to shred our rights in order to prevent fire deaths. We don't demand firemen go door to door inspecting each and every smoke detector. We don't peak at people's financial transactions to make sure that they are buying smoke detectors.
All in all, we're more likely to die from a fire than to terrorism.
Escher's Waterfall
Bluelight Crew
How was the pIRA was also not seeking to supersede the laws of the land? Seems to me that engaging in armed rebellion against the crown and wanting to secede necessitates superseding the laws of the land.
Somerandomdude
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2016
- Messages
- 278
A good point and to be honest i mainly post on my phone and often skim read, my mistake.
The threat posed by jihadists is in fact relatively analogous to the threat posed by the IRA- but with some important differences. The troubles conflict in Ireland had a religious element to it, (Catholic separatists and Protestant Loyalists) but it was more of a conflict about sovereignty and the wish of many Irish people to live in a unified Ireland. The religious part was more incidental to the conflict. On the face it seems at the heart of it, but only because each side strongly identified as either Catholic/Protestant and that was one of the things that set them apart- but not the main thing. The main thing was the wish of the separatists to unify Ireland and the wish of the Loyalists to stay.
Now imagine if the Catholic Church at the time had been issuing fatwas and calling for a literal interpretation of some of the unsavoury old testament verses. Telling Catholics to chop the heads off Protestant infidels etc..
Now I know Islam has no hierarchical structure analogous to that of the Catholic Church but the point still stands. There are respected and influential clerics within both Sunni and Shia Islam whose decrees, teachings and fatwas carry plenty of weight.
So essentially what I'm trying to say is the fact that Islam now is a far more inherently violent ideology, with far greater instances violence being scripturally justified than 20th century Catholicism, means that Islamists/jihadists etc pose in my view, a more dangerous threat in the long term. But obviously the IRA were incredibly dangerous during the troubles and I'm not trying to downplay that.
Another scriptural difference is the different attitudes of different religions to suicide. There's no Catholic Church teaching or for that matter any Christian school of thought that justifies suicide in any way. IRA bombings were all pre-placed bombs and not suicide attacks (to my knowledge, this stuff was a bit before my time but I am of Irish heritage so did grow up hearing about this stuff and have a read a little)
There is plenty of Islamic jurisprudence that justifies committing suicide to fight the infidels etc..
The point here being that an enemy who is quite happy to kill himself in the course of his attacks on you is far, far more dangerous than the one who values his own life too much.
IRA members goal is to live in a unified Ireland.
ISIS members goal is a worldwide caliphate, BUT dying in the course of achieving this and going to paradise is a perfectly acceptable/desirable. In fact you could argue its more important.
Last edited:
^ there are about 1.8 billion muslims in the world - how many more will there need to be before the moderates turn on you, ryan01?
i wasn't aware that you could see into the future. quite the talent
alasdair
i wasn't aware that you could see into the future. quite the talent
alasdair