Three attacks in Britain alone in less than three months.

What many already have forgotten: in the same time period, five more terror attacks like these have been spoiled by British police at the last minute.

Denazification of Islam, as Rockstar put it, is not possible. The result of denazificaiton in Germany was the - intended but not completed - annihilation of Nazism. A deislamisation of Islam necessarily would mean the same objective.

I remind of the facts known about the murderers from madrid and London over a decade ago, catfish. These were no social low class people, no loosers with lacking perspective. They were academics, students, social middle class, with good job perspectives and solid income, described to have been well integrated. IS did not exist back then. Will you never give up your social romanticising about injustice and poverty being the catalyst to turn social losers into radical mass murderers, Catfish? And what is with the many social loosers in Western societies that are not Muslim - but so very less often end up as hate-dripping mass murderers - are they genetically different from Muslim haters, is that what you think? Why are so many Muslims ticking out, and so few others who are in even worse material, social conditions? The difference is not genes. The difference is - this damn ideology that the one group confesses to, and the other not.

You already are on this strange trip again to seek all guilt in the West once again. As always.

The content of Islamic ideology, the message of the prophet - this is all answer you need to all your rhetoric questions.

Its the ideology - this. Ideology.

I know you will not accept that as a fact. But it is a fact. In the end, you simply do not know what you try to talk about, and parrot the Zeitgeist clichees and mainstream media propaganda feeds about humanistic Islam and how peaceful and tolerant it is . You do not talk about Islam. You talk about what you would like Islam to be already. But that is not the Islam of the scripture and the Islam of the Muslims of the past one and a half millenia. Its your wishful thinking only that you base on. Not more. Long time ago, our forefathers were like them: fanatic zealots still taking the writing of the old testament literally. But in the West, and elsewhere, we have developed, we have advanced, we have moved on. Muslim societies still are where they were onethousand fourhundred years ago. Stasis. Paralysis. Resulting in fatalism. Cognitive dissonance between the glory they want to shine in, but which they never were capable to sow for, sinc Muhammad made so drmataically sure that they were left with nothing else than his damn artifical cult that in parts is nothing but a chepa copy of the Jewish and Christian relgion, and that he secured by mercielssly wiping out all intellectual educaiton and scinetific tradition that could lead to rebellion and quesutoning the relguous dogma. The Cahtolic churhc ince tried that, too, but it lost against overwhelming odds in the end - but Islam succeeded until today in the very same repressive effort. We have had the reserve of a rich cutural heritage, namely the Greeks. It was enough to compensate for the many failures and dark chaoters there also have been, and to move beyond these, in the end. Bur the Arab sphere - never has had such a cultural reserve. And that is why a reform of Islam, or a revolt, there never was.

Islam cannot be modenrised or reformed, that would mean to edit the will and law and word of God, and who are th human dwarfes to argue with Allah?

What must happen, is this: Islam has to go. Like Nazism had to go. Fascism. Nobody ever considered to reform nazism, or to give fascism a humanistic face. They had to go. They were and are evil. And so is Islam.

Kick it. "Muslim" is nothign racial, it is no ethnic identity, it is not about biology or genetics. Its a chosen ideology. And with people who stay loyal to this ideology I do not wish to have anything to do with, and I do not care whether they are loyal bcasue they indeed fully understand its ciontent, or whether they have illusions about it, basing on lacking insight and lacking educaiton about it. the latter are what in German are called Mitläufer. They are as dnageorus as the first group, since they escuse and gloss over the dark nature of Islam and is inherent totalitarinaism and supremcism, they help to make it appear in deceptive clothing, to cheta the world and to hide the harm it means to our own values, laws, cultural identities.

Statistically, the often claimed silent majority of tolerant, friendly Muslims is an urban legend anyway, statistics about the dominant piniosn and views expressed amongst the Muslim populations in Muslim countries as well as in the West have debunked these myths since many years already, and repeatedly. What the West calls usually orthodox or close to radical Islam - is the dominant mainstream opinion amongst the global Muslim population. Westerners simple do not want to learn about that. But it has been shown and dekjnstrated from studies published in the time between the world wars, to studies and polls done in the modern present. I also know if from own experience in these countries. The so-called Euro-Islam the EU is babbling about: is nothign but a self-made illusion. It does not exist as a lineage of mentionable size and influence.

There is no Islamism. There is no different Qurans anymore . There is no cherry-picking and no soace for reform. Either you are with us or you are dead, that is how Muhammad ticked. There is not several versions of Allah. There is just one god. And one prohet. And one Islam. And the general agreeing on the abrogation principle. And thats it. Full stop. Period. Basta.

I erased my comment it was wrong

Markus

Well said.

This. This is where the fight against radicalization will be won. I don't think my own country will ever be able to shift it's focus to support such a fight, but the US can (I believe at least). It is vital to get to the bottom of all this.

One big step would be to forbid foreign Imams to preach in Europe (or anywhere else in the West for that matter). There are attempts being made here in Germany to train Imams here under German supervision. That would make sure we know who is preaching and would stop the radical fanatics from Turkey and other countries to come here and preach as they do now. A lot of them don't even speak the language of the country. That needs to stop.

I think it's too late for that. Moderate Muslims open to reform that can accept that (Sweden at least) is a secular country need to work with authorities to stop Imams from spreading extremism and encourage people to fight integration into the host society and equality and independence for women. We have recently allowed the construction of the largest Mosques in scandinavia in an area of Sweden that is already fighting the results of poor integration. It is bankrolled by Qatar and will have a salafist agenda from what I understand. I'm not sure that is a very good idea, but I guess time will tell.

Yes Skybird, we have seen how the catholics had to disappear in North Ireland, to end terrorism. Or, kill all Irish instead.

"Irish Catholicism, I insist, is a religion of peace—even if some of its most visible adherents seem to indicate otherwise. They, I protest, are not true Catholics."
http://www.dukechronicle.com/article...rish-terrorism

"I guess there must just be some unknowable reason that Muslims get a reputation for all being violent terrorists and the Irish don’t."

Too be honest nothing will really be done about these people as politicians have a habit of cutting around the edges and selling it to the people who then buy it.

Indeed. I have seen a shift in behaviour among my Facebook-friends though. It's been a lot of posturing and virtue signaling with nonsensical statements about loving everyone, making 'hand hearts' and changing profile pictures after every 'incident'. This did not happen with Manchester or now with London. Not sure what that means if anything.

What politicians be it MPs or mayors have to say is not terribly interesting. What would be interesting but unrealistic is to hear what police and intel have to say without them having a politician on their shoulders telling them what to say. Often some chief of police have a politicised, empty speech, rarely do intel speak out directly and "never" without politics in mind. It makes sense from an investigative point of view but the interesting bits are either wrapped up in thick layers of noise or completely abscent.
It would be interesting to hear precicely what they really think of the laws and popular opinions that make it near impossible to have a successful investigation of suspects who hide behind foreign relations, domestic laws and silence while mapping out who to reach out for to recruit as or encourage to be the next attacker.

It felt good to read that a few people stood up to the POS with the knives, they started throwing glasses, beer bottles, and chairs at them! And felt damned good to read that the security forces shot and killed them so quickly!

Agreed and if anyone visits the relevent area on the BBC website they can read of first hand accounts of said acts, some of which must have taken incredible amounts of bravery to perform.

Many of the acts were taken by foreign nationals which just goes to show London is truly an international city :salute:

When actual, innocent, human lives are at stake, borders have a tendency to disappear and are replaced with basic human decency and the need to help a fellow person in distress...




<O>

A few links that outline some of the heroicsa:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40149836

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entr...b02478cb9c6e0e

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entr...b0c242ca24c50e

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/371828...woman-stabbed/

~SALUTE~