Topic: Two Swedish football fans shot dead by alleged IS terrorist

[surfer. Fuck you generator.]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-67129117

[J_Kopite]

Is there a compelling reason why the person/people who did not deport this man should not be tried for involuntary manslaughter?

[surfer. Fuck you generator.]

A correction to the title: Islamic state inspired killer, rather than a member.

[TSC]

Another fatal hate crime took place in the USA with a child paying the ultimate price.  Disturbing times.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-67085553

[Mister Flip Flop]

What a dickhead. Fortunately these type of attacks have vastly reduced over the last few years much to the despair of the Tommy Robinson/Nigel Frottage types of this world.

R.I.P. to the victims

[Lee1-6Liv]

The shooter has been shot dead in a cafe in Brussels.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-67131128

[In the Name of Klopp]

Well done Rasmus Paludan, you've achieved your goal. Our Foreign Minister did say, the Quran burnings Rasmus and his ilks did in Sweden and Denmark, would get people killed. I'm glad they're putting a law into place that you can't burn holy books. Nothing good comes out of it.

[jillcwhomever]

RIP to the two fans. 

[PhilV]

Well done Rasmus Paludan, you've achieved your goal. Our Foreign Minister did say, the Quran burnings Rasmus and his ilks did in Sweden and Denmark, would get people killed. I'm glad they're putting a law into place that you can't burn holy books. Nothing good comes out of it.

Absolute nonsense. If you feel the need to kill someone because they burnt a book then you are  deranged psycho or indoctrinated in some serious way.

Also, if we go along with this illogical train of thought, then why did this guy not go after those people instead of random innocents who just happen to be from same country?

Bad take I'm afraid.


RIP to those poor people who lost their lives to this lunatic.

[Mister Flip Flop]

Incredible that you're blaming the book burning instead of the religion that murders innocents whenever their feelings get hurt.

There's what 3 billion Muslims in the world, but yeah you keep banging the "they all want us dead" drum.

[Nobby Reserve]

I'm glad they're putting a law into place that you can't burn holy books. Nothing good comes out of it.

What utter, utter shite.

Religious books are no different to any other work of fiction.

I despise how religions and people's choice of religious garbage are given special protection in law, when they're no different to/more important than, say, a person's political beliefs, choice of football team, musical preference, favourite colour or type of cake.

If anyone takes all that sky fairy bollocks so seriously that they want to murder other people, then it's the cretins who take it so seriously that are the problem.

Not the ones who lampoon or pour scorn on the idiocy of religion.

[killer-heels]

Religion is dog shit.

[Kenny's Jacket]

Religion is dog shit.

or god shit

[surfer. Fuck you generator.]

You have to be clear eyed about it.

Everything is open to analysis, criticism.  Burn whatever, think whatever, be civil, build. This is why the West can manage economically, even with all the issues while Muslim majority states are failed enterprises, even ones like Saudi who sell what they don't create, innovate or build, but what's been given.

Your greatest resource is people, in a fair, calm environment that permits open analysis. You want this to continue, then filter who you let in. If a guy cannot put these things above his own beliefs, and you let him enter, that's one step closer to your country turning into the shithole he came from. People make places, what's in their heads.
There was a superb post on how to structure a secular West in the binned Israel thread, it's a waste it's gone. I would make it the charter for every country that wants to make the most of its people.

[evie]

The shooter has been shot dead in a cafe in Brussels.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-67131128

Good riddance. For him I hope hell exists.

[evie]

Absolute nonsense. If you feel the need to kill someone because they burnt a book then you are  deranged psycho or indoctrinated in some serious way.

Also, if we go along with this illogical train of thought, then why did this guy not go after those people instead of random innocents who just happen to be from same country?

Bad take I'm afraid.


RIP to those poor people who lost their lives to this lunatic.

When you know what it might lead to, when you know how the world is, it’s stupid and unnecessary to burn a holy book, on the other hand I agree with you. Using ”they burned our holy book” as an excuse for murder is  a very medieval argument.

[stoa]

There was some good stuff in there when you sift through the anger and partisanship. But I don't think there has ever been an Israel-Palestine discussion in the history of the internet that has not devolved into mudslinging - it doesn't matter what forum or platform you are on. I don't blame anyone who can't be arsed moderating that.

The problem is that it's a conflict that has been going on for decades (or even close to a century). Both sides have done some awful stuff during that time. Yet, discussions always seem to revolve around finding a guilty party or finding an easy solution for a very complicated matter. As a result you'll get two sides throwing stuff at each other and both sides are right and wrong at the same time in terms of the bigger picture.

When you know what it might lead to, when you know how the world is, it’s stupid and unnecessary to burn a holy book, on the other hand I agree with you. Using ”they burned our holy book” as an excuse for murder is  a very medieval argument.

Don't have an issue with burning a holy book, caricatures or whatever. What I'm not a fan of is burning a holy book not despite what reaction it might lead to, but specifically to get said reaction, which what happened in Sweden I think. If you do that, you're a massive c*nt. Still no reason to want to murder anyone.

[Boston always unofficial]

Another fatal hate crime took place in the USA with a child paying the ultimate price.  Disturbing times.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-67085553

And in Hartlepool,https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-tees-67131778. One dead one injured by a Moroccan.

[andy07]

Really surprising how (relatively) low key the media response has been to this, which is a little concerning.

[WhereAngelsPlay]

Really surprising how (relatively) low key the media response has been to this, which is a little concerning.

Was the No1 story on the BBC right up until hundreds were murdered by another phantom missile on yet another hospital.

[WhereAngelsPlay]

And in Hartlepool,https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-tees-67131778. One dead one injured by a Moroccan.

One was attacked because of what he was & the other got caught up in a fight.

Not the same thing.

[andy07]

Was the No1 story on the BBC right up until hundreds were murdered by another phantom missile on yet another hospital.

Unfortunately it wasn’t very high on the BBC list.  And, quite rightly all current news is focussed on the horrendous missile attack on the hospital.

[Kalito]

One was attacked because of what he was & the other got caught up in a fight.

Not the same thing.

Pretty much nailed it.

The injured person named Javed Nouri ...

[jepovic]

Well done Rasmus Paludan, you've achieved your goal. Our Foreign Minister did say, the Quran burnings Rasmus and his ilks did in Sweden and Denmark, would get people killed. I'm glad they're putting a law into place that you can't burn holy books. Nothing good comes out of it.

That's a fucking awful, victim blaming take on this. Paludan didnt kill anybody, the islamist terrorist did. Paludan is a c*nt, but that is not illegal and it shouldnt be.

There are no plans to ban burning of Quran in Sweden, that is a misunderstanding. It would be political suicide to suggest it now.

These people wont settle for banning Quran burnings. They want to ban free press, womens rights and democracy too. Should we give that to them as well?

This is not a complicated issue at all (unlike Israel-Palestine). Islamists want to end our free society,  and we need to protect it. Our ancestors fought hard to free our societies from religious (christian) oppression, and then the Nazis, and now we need to fight to keep it free.

[So… Howard Philips]

Pretty much nailed it.

The injured person named Javed Nouri ...

And the murdered man was named Terence Carney.

Carney was murdered half a mile away from the scene if the original stabbing. What the murderer’s motivations were are unclear.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/oct/17/man-appears-in-court-charged-with-murder-of-passerby-in-hartlepool

[Kenny's Jacket]

And the murdered man was named Terence Carney.

Carney was murdered half a mile away from the scene if the original stabbing. What the murderer’s motivations were are unclear.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/oct/17/man-appears-in-court-charged-with-murder-of-passerby-in-hartlepool

The Tory MP for the area was scaremongering in Parliament yesterday. 

[So… Howard Philips]

The Tory MP for the area was scaremongering in Parliament yesterday.

Unfortunately someone randomly stabbed to death is pretty scary and will play into the hands if those who want to exploit that justified fear.

[LuverlyRita]

That's a fucking awful, victim blaming take on this. Paludan didnt kill anybody, the islamist terrorist did. Paludan is a c*nt, but that is not illegal and it shouldnt be.

There are no plans to ban burning of Quran in Sweden, that is a misunderstanding. It would be political suicide to suggest it now.

These people wont settle for banning Quran burnings. They want to ban free press, womens rights and democracy too. Should we give that to them as well?

This is not a complicated issue at all (unlike Israel-Palestine). Islamists want to end our free society,  and we need to protect it. Our ancestors fought hard to free our societies from religious (christian) oppression, and then the Nazis, and now we need to fight to keep it free.

I think it is more complicated than you think. As an atheist, I think all religions are a load of controlling nonsense and, in particular, that religion and politics make dangerous bedfellows. Nevertheless I support the ECHR mandate that "Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion". Obviously the second bit is also important (and sadly missed by some ) - i.e. "this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief, in worship, teaching, practice and observance".
The Quran may not be important to you or I but it is important to ordinary decent, peace-loving Muslims like Sadio and Mo. There's a massive difference between not supporting Islam and being deliberately provocative and offensive. I don't expect visiting fans at Anfield to be generous with their praise of us or our team but, tragedy chanting crosses the line for me and so does deliberately burning the Quran in the faces of people for whom the book is important. By all means campaign for equal rights etc but surely there are better ways of doing it?

[Bobsackamano]

That's a fucking awful, victim blaming take on this. Paludan didnt kill anybody, the islamist terrorist did. Paludan is a c*nt, but that is not illegal and it shouldnt be.

There are no plans to ban burning of Quran in Sweden, that is a misunderstanding. It would be political suicide to suggest it now.

These people wont settle for banning Quran burnings. They want to ban free press, womens rights and democracy too. Should we give that to them as well?

This is not a complicated issue at all (unlike Israel-Palestine). Islamists want to end our free society,  and we need to protect it. Our ancestors fought hard to free our societies from religious (christian) oppression, and then the Nazis, and now we need to fight to keep it free.

Totally agree. Unfortunately there is a strain of Islam, which is growing, that doesn't separate the religious from the political; pretty much like Christianity before the reformation. If you give religions like that an inch they will take a mile.

The West thinks it can manage this without putting constraints on Islam within out own borders in the name of freedom for religion, it's a short sighted position that will bite us on our arses. Freedom from religion is just as important as 'freedom for' aspect if we want Islam to find a healthy place within our societies.

The politicians are terrified of being called racist which would be a lazy label applied to a policy of controlling the political aspects of religion. The crazy thing is the last thing the average Muslim wants is to be controlled by the religious authorities, look at Iran, we would eventually get heavy backing from the Muslim populations if we dealt strongly with radical Islam.

Religions can actually inspire people to do fantastic, altruistic things and can be positive facets of society however they need to have clear boundaries and limits otherwise the zealots will go as far as they can. Western liberalism needs to have more confidence in its founding principles and reasoning, the liberation of individuals from the threat of totalitarian control be it political or religious.

[Kenny's Jacket]

Totally agree. Unfortunately there is a strain of Islam, which is growing, that doesn't separate the religious from the political; pretty much like Christianity before the reformation. If you give religions like that an inch they will take a mile.

The West thinks it can manage this without putting constraints on Islam within out own borders in the name of freedom for religion, it's a short sighted position that will bite us on our arses. Freedom from religion is just as important as 'freedom for' aspect if we want Islam to find a healthy place within our societies.

The politicians are terrified of being called racist which would be a lazy label applied to a policy of controlling the political aspects of religion. The crazy thing is the last thing the average Muslim wants is to be controlled by the religious authorities, look at Iran, we would eventually get heavy backing from the Muslim populations if we dealt strongly with radical Islam.

Religions can actually inspire people to do fantastic, altruistic things and can be positive facets of society however they need to have clear boundaries and limits otherwise the zealots will go as far as they can. Western liberalism needs to have more confidence in its founding principles and reasoning, the liberation of individuals from the threat of totalitarian control be it political or religious.

What sort of constraints do you think would help?

[jepovic]

I think it is more complicated than you think. As an atheist, I think all religions are a load of controlling nonsense and, in particular, that religion and politics make dangerous bedfellows. Nevertheless I support the ECHR mandate that "Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion". Obviously the second bit is also important (and sadly missed by some ) - i.e. "this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief, in worship, teaching, practice and observance".
The Quran may not be important to you or I but it is important to ordinary decent, peace-loving Muslims like Sadio and Mo. There's a massive difference between not supporting Islam and being deliberately provocative and offensive. I don't expect visiting fans at Anfield to be generous with their praise of us or our team but, tragedy chanting crosses the line for me and so does deliberately burning the Quran in the faces of people for whom the book is important. By all means campaign for equal rights etc but surely there are better ways of doing it?

Tragedy chanting is a disgrace, so is quaran burning, but it is not an excuse for murdering people just because they are from the same country (although Paludan is Danish and the other guy who has burned Quarans is from Iraq).

This would be the equivalent of a Liverpool fan murdering two random ManU fans just because some other ManU fans chanted, and then people blaming the chanting fans for the murder.

We have to realize that these islamists wont be satisfied with anything less than an Iran-like state. If we ban quaran burnings, they will find something else. You cant negotiate or compromise with such people. 

[Nobby Reserve]

Totally agree. Unfortunately there is a strain of Islam, which is growing, that doesn't separate the religious from the political; pretty much like Christianity before the reformation. If you give religions like that an inch they will take a mile.

The West thinks it can manage this without putting constraints on Islam within out own borders in the name of freedom for religion, it's a short sighted position that will bite us on our arses. Freedom from religion is just as important as 'freedom for' aspect if we want Islam to find a healthy place within our societies.

The politicians are terrified of being called racist which would be a lazy label applied to a policy of controlling the political aspects of religion. The crazy thing is the last thing the average Muslim wants is to be controlled by the religious authorities, look at Iran, we would eventually get heavy backing from the Muslim populations if we dealt strongly with radical Islam.

Religions can actually inspire people to do fantastic, altruistic things and can be positive facets of society however they need to have clear boundaries and limits otherwise the zealots will go as far as they can. Western liberalism needs to have more confidence in its founding principles and reasoning, the liberation of individuals from the threat of totalitarian control be it political or religious.

I agree with you.

A huge chunk of the problem is caused by Saudi funding the extremitisation of Islam, through exporting its own warped 'Salafi' interpretation (as espoused much earlier by Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab, who had helped Muhamad bin Saud conquer much of the Arabian Peninsular and elevate the Sauds from a bunch of shitmunching nomad-bandits).

I've talked before of the massive, long-term ramifications of how [mainly] the US, Saudi and Pakistan colluded to create an army of tens of thousands of religiously-deranged terrorists to fight the Soviets*. As well as creating a post-jihad pool of Islamist terrorists skilled in guerrilla and terrorist tactics and weaponry, it brought a previously mostly insular Saudi Arabia into the wider geopolitical field, and they used their dirty petrodollars to fund the spread of ultra-oppressive Wahhabist Islam through the building of mosques and training of extremist preachers.






* who were only in Afghanistan at the repeated behest of the Afghan government - a point conveniently ignored by western media)

[CowboyKangaroo]

I think it is more complicated than you think. As an atheist, I think all religions are a load of controlling nonsense and, in particular, that religion and politics make dangerous bedfellows. Nevertheless I support the ECHR mandate that "Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion". Obviously the second bit is also important (and sadly missed by some ) - i.e. "this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief, in worship, teaching, practice and observance".
The Quran may not be important to you or I but it is important to ordinary decent, peace-loving Muslims like Sadio and Mo. There's a massive difference between not supporting Islam and being deliberately provocative and offensive. I don't expect visiting fans at Anfield to be generous with their praise of us or our team but, tragedy chanting crosses the line for me and so does deliberately burning the Quran in the faces of people for whom the book is important. By all means campaign for equal rights etc but surely there are better ways of doing it?

I don't think you understand the ECHR if you think Article 9 it is relevant at all to an individual burning a book. No person's right to freedom of religion is impaired or restricted at all, unless you stole the book off them! The importance one might put on someone else's property isn't relevant to the ECHR. Article 10 is relevant - and (generally) it protects the act of burning a book. (The case law is complex here however - shocking ideas, which offend and hurt are protected, but not outright incitement to religious hatred - the line is hard to spot). Both rights are qualified, which means the state can interfere with them, provided they do so in a way which is proportionate to their legitimate aim.

[Bobsackamano]

What sort of constraints do you think would help?

That religious freedom means you can freely choose to join a religion or freely leave a religion.

The acceptance of the ability for individuals to exercise control over their own lives without interference from outside groups. In practice this would be the ability for anybody to leave any particular religion without that group exercising undue pressure on the individual to remain an adherent of that religion. This should be reinforced to all children in school as a fundamental right. In fact get rid of all religious schools and make them totally secular like France.

In addition all children should learn they can love who they like and seek to further themselves professionally in any way their abilities allow. Fundamentally this is about removing women from the control of men under guise of religious practice.

The more fundamentalist Islamic/Christian/Judaism sects would struggle to exist in such a climate and would either have to adapt or leave.

[Bobsackamano]

Yes they are definitely one of the more concerning sects. They add nothing to our country and are at complete odds with any kind of liberal humanist society.

[Jiminy Cricket]

I don't think you understand the ECHR if you think Article 9 it is relevant at all to an individual burning a book. No person's right to freedom of religion is impaired or restricted at all, unless you stole the book off them! The importance one might put on someone else's property isn't relevant to the ECHR. Article 10 is relevant - and (generally) it protects the act of burning a book. (The case law is complex here however - shocking ideas, which offend and hurt are protected, but not outright incitement to religious hatred - the line is hard to spot). Both rights are qualified, which means the state can interfere with them, provided they do so in a way which is proportionate to their legitimate aim.

Interesting.

The burning of a religious book to deliberately upset people is a rather questionable action. I would not have it outlawed, but I might consider it irresponsible. I felt similarly about Charlie Hebdo and their deliberate baiting of Islamists. It is juvenile stuff, and potentially dangerous too. If someone did it for 'art', (a la the KLF burning a million pounds and the upset that caused many people), questioning what it means to burn the money/book and all of that, I might even have a measure of respect for that. But if it is done purely to 'provoke' dangerous people, that seems rather self-centered and foolhardy.

But ultimately, I would not like to see such things banned. People need to understand and accept that their ideas are fair game, even religious ideas, no matter how sacrosanct they might be to the individual.

[LuverlyRita]

Interesting.

The burning of a religious book to deliberately upset people is a rather questionable action. I would not have it outlawed, but I might consider it irresponsible. I felt similarly about Charlie Hebdo and their deliberate baiting of Islamists. It is juvenile stuff, and potentially dangerous too. If someone did it for 'art', (a la the KLF burning a million pounds and the upset that caused many people), questioning what it means to burn the money/book and all of that, I might even have a measure of respect for that. But if it is done purely to 'provoke' dangerous people, that seems rather self-centered and foolhardy.

But ultimately, I would not like to see such things banned. People need to understand and accept that their ideas are fair game, even religious ideas, no matter how sacrosanct they might be to the individual.

That's the point I was trying to make. With freedoms come responsibilties. Setting out to offend and upset invariably offends and upsets perfectly decent people. Burning the Quran does nothing to help the plight of oppressed women and serves only to prompt extremists into inexcusable actions (which at no point was I trying to excuse).

[LuverlyRita]

In fact get rid of all religious schools and make them totally secular like France.

Totally agree with this. Aside from breaking down barriers there are practical issues. In parts of Liverpool some kids have to travel large distances to school because their local schools are "the wrong religion". Children are children and should have no labels attached

[Kenny's Jacket]

Totally agree with this. Aside from breaking down barriers there are practical issues. In parts of Liverpool some kids have to travel large distances to school because their local schools are "the wrong religion". Children are children and should have no labels attached

Its a decent suggestion from Bob about schools, but kids  pick up shit from their family, friends internet etc.

[Bobsackamano]

The above is obviously stuff we agree like but I was asking for clarity on this
How can the west put constraints on Muslims that allows people to leave Islam or love who they choose (as examples from your reply)

It's constraints on Islam that I would advocate not constraints on Muslims. This is actually about freeing Muslims from the constraints that fundamentalist Islam imposes on them, particularly women. I wouldn't claim to have all the answers and it's a hard task but you start with the children, all kids to go through an entirely secular education up to the age of 18 with the rights of the individual and the benefits of liberal humanism promoted throughout. After 18 people can do as they wish but all kids to have a schooling up to that age entirely free of religion would go a long way in breaking the back of these crank religions.