Suicide bomb gang guilty of plotting 'worst ever terror attack in Britain'

[Robert]

If society is to blame then society either had power which it chose not to exercise (since one can't be blamed for something outside one's control) or else it failed to acquire such power when it should have done. Therefore society, to avoid blame, must acquire and exercise that power.

I don't like the way that's heading. It's perfectly OK to frame and enforce laws designed to safeguard society from violence. But you can't engineer a society (or to put it in the current economics jargon : you can't micro-manage individual consciences).

[Fleetwood Mac]

A certain coutry tried demonising others, as non-citizens, some 80 years ago.
History tells us what then occurred and where such intolerance leads.

So he did. He was like you in that he didn't possess the wherewithal to grasp a concept. Just as he cynically manipulated the ideas of Nietzsche, so are you with reference to the 'neo-fascists' (and that is probably giving you more credit than you deserve because I have a feeling that you simply do not understand the basic concept of law and order nor the basics of Fascism, just as you didn't understand the basic tenets of Christianity).

Actually, history tells us that in the event we tolerate those who have absolutely no regard for the law, using your example Hitler, or totalitarians, using my examples: Nazi Germany, Communist Russia and so forth, then we are in trouble.

To help with the Fascism concept: it is an idea that places cultural regeneration at the heart of it. In actual fact, Hitler was unusual among fascists as he placed anti-semitism at the core of his philosophy; unlike all other fascist movements, such as Mussolini, who do tend to be anti-semitic, but the primary drive is cultural regeneration. So it is misleading to use Nazi Germany as an example of Fascism.

As it happens, I'm a liberal. Not the confused and distorted version of Liberalism that has morphed today, god knows how; god knows why. But being a liberal does not mean affording carte blanche to those who want to blow us up. Being a liberal means understanding that we all have a choice to act as we do - call it individual responsibility, which is at the heart of Liberalism, but certainly not at the heart of today's strange and malnourished form of Liberalism.

[Fleetwood Mac]

Before leaving the neo-fascists among us to rant

Says it all really.

Clueless.

This fellow needs a cursory education in political philosophy.

[Phil H]

Before leaving the neo-fascists among us to rant, I'll say this:

But it seemed to me that your remarks about sympathy etc tended to suggest that the rest of society might have a small share of the guilt too. This is what I thought was daft.

Doone wrote centuries ago that "no man is an island".

Of course we all bear some measure of blame when these things occur, and at all sorts of levels.

If we do not seek intelligently to explore, understand and recognise why things happen, we will never be able to do anything about them.

A certain coutry tried demonising others, as non-citizens, some 80 years ago.
History tells us what then occurred and where such intolerance leads.

I frankly pity those whose who are so dried up in their xenophobia that they cannot stand back from their own pathetic sterility. I am ashamed to speak the same language as them.

When I leave this thread I'll wash my hands.

phil

[Fleetwood Mac]

But Mac, what you seem to be misunderstanding is that all of these men were British-born citizens, and as such have to be dealt with under British law.

They were suspected of plotting terrorist activities, they were infiltrated, caught, placed on trial and sentenced (or will be sentenced) according to the law of this land. That is the only option open to us. We are not 'putting up with it' - we are dealing with it according to what the laws of this land allow.

They did not 'infest' our country - they were born and raised here. Their views and actions are our responsibility, our worry. We have to try to understand their actions in order to prevent furture planned attacks.

The 'Prevent' training being pioneered and delivered by the police to teachers, youth workers and other community workers helps to identify behaviour likely to become radicalised. It trains us to identify young people likely to be vulnerbale to radical grooming and initiates various initiatives to help young people from diverse communities to inigrate and work together.

Great.

Let's spend a **** load of tax payers money employing people who love nothing more than a cause to understand people who want to blow us up.

Tell you what, Julie, we must be a laughing stock in countries like the US and Australia.

It would be funny except it's beyond pathetic.

All part of the post imperial malaise, I suppose. Let's save everyone and the world!

[Robert]

"The 'Prevent' training being pioneered and delivered by the police to teachers, youth workers and other community workers helps to identify behaviour likely to become radicalised. It trains us to identify young people likely to be vulnerbale to radical grooming and initiates various initiatives to help young people from diverse communities to inigrate and work together."

This smells of Big Brother.

BTW, what are diverse communities? Has the word "diverse" simply come to mean "non-white"?

[Limehouse]

Except Phil didn't express those views.

Phil attempted to convince people (mind you, you'd have to be easily convinced to believe it) that it's not the fault of the people showing contempt for this society. He lays the blame squarely at the door of those who isolate and marginalise them (whoever 'those' may be).

Absolute crock. The usual stuff trotted out every now and again.

The EDL are another group of idiots who need to grow up a bit, as do the extremists and those defending them. It is their choice to act as they do; no one is forcing them to undermine the law. They have had a good old crack of the whip here, which they wouldn't have had in many another country.

99% of muslims are law abiding and happy to live here under the laws of the land. The figures tell us this. But the 1% need shipping out quick sharp.

They wouldn't put up with it in the US nor Australia and yet muslims in those country are far better integrated than here. To allow these people to infest our country it does a disservice to the 99% of law abiding muslims as it is a recipe for tension and mistrust. That's why it works in the US and Australia - don't put up with the nonsense and the rest of society, whether they be muslims or otherwise, will live in relative harmony.

But Mac, what you seem to be misunderstanding is that all of these men were British-born citizens, and as such have to be dealt with under British law.

They were suspected of plotting terrorist activities, they were infiltrated, caught, placed on trial and sentenced (or will be sentenced) according to the law of this land. That is the only option open to us. We are not 'putting up with it' - we are dealing with it according to what the laws of this land allow.

They did not 'infest' our country - they were born and raised here. Their views and actions are our responsibility, our worry. We have to try to understand their actions in order to prevent furture planned attacks.

The 'Prevent' training being pioneered and delivered by the police to teachers, youth workers and other community workers helps to identify behaviour likely to become radicalised. It trains us to identify young people likely to be vulnerbale to radical grooming and initiates various initiatives to help young people from diverse communities to inigrate and work together.

[Fleetwood Mac]

Can you provide any evidence to support your statement that 'these people were given free housing and welfare?'

Additionally, Afghanistan was a prefectly liberal country with plenty of freedoms until certain 'western democracies' started interferring with their system, thus allowing the Taliban to gain control and force women back into hiding under veils and out of public life.

Classic.

Julie, do me a favour, please, let me know which century/decade you're talking about (with reference to the 'perfectly liberal country'.

[Fleetwood Mac]

Phil, I think this is an excellent post.

I am in no way excusing what these men planned to do. However, having recently undergone 'Prevent' training with the local police, I understand more fully how young people can become radicalised.

I work extensively with young male (and female) Muslims and, almost without exception, they respect and value the society they live in and make a very good attempt to understand non-Muslim views and feelings.

Yesterday, in Cambridge, there was an EDL protest against the building of a mosque in the city. About 40 (at most EDL supporters turned out to express their views and feelings. About 500 other people, showing solidarity towards the Muslim community in Cambridge, turned up to oppose the EDL views. I think this event reflects the views of Phil as expressed above.

Julie

Except Phil didn't express those views.

Phil attempted to convince people (mind you, you'd have to be easily convinced to believe it) that it's not the fault of the people showing contempt for this society. He lays the blame squarely at the door of those who isolate and marginalise them (whoever 'those' may be).

Absolute crock. The usual stuff trotted out every now and again.

The EDL are another group of idiots who need to grow up a bit, as do the extremists and those defending them. It is their choice to act as they do; no one is forcing them to undermine the law. They have had a good old crack of the whip here, which they wouldn't have had in many another country.

99% of muslims are law abiding and happy to live here under the laws of the land. The figures tell us this. But the 1% need shipping out quick sharp.

They wouldn't put up with it in the US nor Australia and yet muslims in those country are far better integrated than here. To allow these people to infest our country it does a disservice to the 99% of law abiding muslims as it is a recipe for tension and mistrust. That's why it works in the US and Australia - don't put up with the nonsense and the rest of society, whether they be muslims or otherwise, will live in relative harmony.

[Robert]

Phil, before you go (and before, I think, I go too) : I know that you were not sympathising witrh the bombers. But it seemed to me that your remarks about sympathy etc tended to suggest that the rest of society might have a small share of the guilt too. This is what I thought was daft.

On your second point, you said that people who live in Britain are among the luckiest people on earth. That seemed to me to be at odds with your suggestion that the bombers may have encountered a lack of understanding and sympathy. How much understanding and sympathy do people need - let alone all the other things you have gone on to mention i.e. affluence, freedom, stability, safety, free education and healthcare and high level of welfare support)? In other words, Phil, we shouldn't have to wet nurse these people or send out teams of social workers to persuade them not to bomb people to smithereens.

[Limehouse]

It wasn't God but good old fashioned police work.

I have the misfortune of living in Britain, a country where hatred for white people by fundamentalists is tolerated by the police and by the government.

You can be sure that if I went to Afghanistan or Iraq and started shouting anti-Muslim slogans I would soon be taken away and probably decapitated.

Instead Britain gives these people free housing and welfare. What do they do with this free money? Make bombs to blow us up.

Can you provide any evidence to support your statement that 'these people were given free housing and welfare?'

Additionally, Afghanistan was a prefectly liberal country with plenty of freedoms until certain 'western democracies' started interferring with their system, thus allowing the Taliban to gain control and force women back into hiding under veils and out of public life.

[Limehouse]

"These people" as you call them - were all born in the UK, had a right to live here and had received all the benefits of a state education, the health service etc.

Maybe, to an extent, it is the lack of understanding, sympathy, sense of diversity or equality shown by some in this country, that help alienate and radicalise such young men.

We have moved on from the immigration of the 50s and 60s when first generation immigrants were arriving in the UK. We are now dealing with the grandchildren or great grandchildren of such people - they are British, as much as anyone can be. Many in their communities are as shocked by their actions as anyone could be.

If we want a tolerant and equal society which benefits everyone; if we want to enjoy free speech, then the law will (in some cases) seem to bend over too far. But we either believe in human rights or we do not.

I am not seeking to excuse the actions of the three young men, but I do take exception to the condesceding tone of the previous post.

If you have read the Harry Potter books, do you stand with the Malfoys only respecting "pure bloods"? That attitude leads eventually to gas chambers and genocide - them and us.

No one in Britain today is likely to be pure anything (a few welsh and Scots maybe). We are all descendents of immigrants whether Roman, Dane, Saxon, Norman or more recent arrivals. When do we stop being they and become us?

If we are all citizens, how would you discriminate between which citizens should receive and which not, benefits? On the basis of ethnicity or the length of time people/families have been resident?

People of all classes, origins and cultures commit crimes, some horrific ones. The IRA committed huge terrorist outrages, but we did not condemn every Irishman and woman.

Sorry for the rant - and I have my moments of anger too (who doesn't) - but rationally, TOLERANCE and understanding (what a Christian would call LOVE) is the only way.

Phil

Edited to add: When someone writes I have the misfortune of living in Britain I can only observe that you are one of the luckiest peple on earth and millions would (and do) give much to take your place.

Phil, I think this is an excellent post.

I am in no way excusing what these men planned to do. However, having recently undergone 'Prevent' training with the local police, I understand more fully how young people can become radicalised.

I work extensively with young male (and female) Muslims and, almost without exception, they respect and value the society they live in and make a very good attempt to understand non-Muslim views and feelings.

Yesterday, in Cambridge, there was an EDL protest against the building of a mosque in the city. About 40 (at most EDL supporters turned out to express their views and feelings. About 500 other people, showing solidarity towards the Muslim community in Cambridge, turned up to oppose the EDL views. I think this event reflects the views of Phil as expressed above.

Julie

[Phil H]

I I really want nothing more to do with the sort of people who are posting here.

I have said what I needed to.

I leave this thread.

Phil

[Fleetwood Mac]

You miss my point. I am not talking about Muslims. I am talking about having no organized religions of any kind.

Mike

Seems we're missing each other's points then.

'Fraid the government, you nor I have no business controlling what people believe nor their freedom to form a society to share and promote their beliefs.

[The Good Michael]

Can't agree, Mike.

In the event a family, of any religion, agree that the wife should wear head dress, of any nature; and the wife should place education of secondary importance to home making, then that is consensual and does not remove anyone's political freedom under the law.

Political freedom extends to equal rights and opportunities under the law, and where you choose to forgo these opportunities then that is no business for government, law, you or I.

What we're talking about here is movements whose express purpose is to undermine British law through violent means. These people have to go; they have to be removed from our society as they have absolutely no intention of conforming to our law and make the destruction of it their reason for being.

Culture and religion is of no concern in this; English law is the fundamental aspect in this shambles. After all, who am I, and who are you, to suggest that the law abiding christian/agnostic/atheist lives a richer and more freedom governened life than the law abiding muslim? I wouldn't automatically assume that head dress renders the muslim less free than you or I.

The point is our law, our property, our institutions. Those who want to overthrow it by violent means should go. They wouldn't put up with this in the US or Australia, and yet muslims are better integrated in those two countries than they are here. Coincidence or correlation?

You miss my point. I am not talking about Muslims. I am talking about having no organized religions of any kind.

Mike