You don't seem to understand that the ideology of the Boston Bombers does not represent radicalisation but is simply the ideology of Islam itself. Merely attending services in any Mosque in the world, exposes worshipers to Islamic scriptures that mandate murder of infidels, especially those who attack Muslims and those who fund them. In addition, the Islamic law of Tequiya encourages deceit to protect Islam. Hence the disparity between Islamic speeches in English & what is said in Arabic for local consumption. Failure to scrutinise Islam is our Achilles heel.

http://youtu.be/-SoXs-0_rHY

Those guys were pathetic. They had plenty of time to complete the severing of the soldiers head and then they could have paraded around for twenty minutes holding it up by the hair with gore dripping out of the neck. That would have really woken people up to just what a bunch of blood-thirsty barbarians civilized nations are having to deal with.
Instead, within hours there were people on tv telling the compliant citizens that it was their own fault these hard-done-by young fellas had been forced into an act of justifiable revenge.
At least in Syria they are muslims killing muslims. Pommies can't be blamed for that....yet.

OZSHRINK makes an important point, these kinds of atrocities are far from unusual in Islamic societies. Attacks on non-Moslem religious minorities, and other Moslems because of religious differences are regular occurrences in Moslem nations, why should they behave differently in the West?

The notion that Islamic beliefs and practices can be reconciled to liberal democracy without transforming Islam is naive and self-destructive. Islam is a totalitarian ideology and of course its adherents are alienated and uncompromising, no amount of multi-culti pixie dust and self-reflection will make any difference. The problem is the cultural baggage Moslems bring with them.

Sweden, that (somewhat smug) exemplar of anti-racist policies and the successful integration of immigrants has learned a lesson the hard way over the past few days--

http://www.theage.com.au/world/swedes-seek-answers-as-riots-leave-suburbs-alight-20130526-2n56d.html

So, although it's a thoughtful and interesting article, I don't think that the author has really identified the problem--sometimes the "Other" really is a threat.

Last month Jack Tytell was sentenced to life imprisonment for murdering two Palestinians.

Quote

According to the indictment, in around May 1997, when Tytell was still in the US, he decided to murder Palestinians and came to Israel for that purpose, smuggling a gun into the country by hiding it in a VCR.

He spent his first weeks in Israel with friends in Jerusalem.

He managed to acquire bullets for his smuggled gun, and began seeking out a suitable victim.

The indictment states that he chose to murder an Arab taxi driver because he thought he could ask the driver first to drive him to a suitable spot.

On June 8, 1997, he went to the Arab taxi stand at Damascus Gate in Jerusalem, the indictment says, where he hired Balbisi and asked him to drive him to a hotel. After driving for a while, Tytell told Balbisi to stop and wait, then proceeded to shoot the Palestinian man in the head at point-blank range.

The indictment also charges Tytell with the murder of a second Palestinian man, Beduin shepherd Isaa Mousa’af Mahamada, who was shot dead near the West Bank settlement of Carmel, near Hebron, in August 1997.

End quote

http://www.jpost.com/National-News/Terrorist-Teitel-sentenced-to-life-for-murders-309222

He also attempted to kill Christianised Jews.

He doesn't quite fit the description of 'home grown' but it is pretty close. Do we now blame the ideology of Judaism for his actions?

Maybe if the grown men of the world were not such small people in mind and thought they would consider this is just another murder and stop turning it into something else.

Cameron sounded like a prat ranting how they won't give in to terrorism, yet he expects that the Iraqis and Afghans should just give into our terrorism.

Here's the full text of the killer's speech to camera again, he's not mad, he's lucid and in control of his emotions, there is no need to wonder why or to ask these searching questions, here it is in black and white:

“The only reason we have killed this man today is because Muslims are dying daily by British soldiers, and this British soldier is one, is a eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. By Allah, we swear by the Almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you until you leave us alone. So what if we want to live by the Sharia in Muslim lands. Why does that mean you must follow us and chase us and call us extremists and kill us? Rather you lot are extreme. You are the ones. When you drop a bomb, do you think it hits one person or rather your bomb wipes out a whole family. This is the reality. By Allah, if I saw your mother today with a buggy I would help her up the stairs. This is my nature. But we are forced by the Qur’an in Sura at-Tawba [Chapter 9 of the Qur'an], through many, many ayah [verses] throughout the Qur’an that [say] we must fight them as they fight us, a eye for a eye and a tooth for a tooth. I apologise that women had to witness this today, but in our land our women have to see the same. You people will never be safe. Remove your governments. They don’t care about you. Do you think David Cameron is gonna get caught in the street when we start busting our guns? Do you think the politicians are going to die? No it’s going to be the average guy, like you, and your children. So get rid of them. Tell them to bring our troops back so we ca.., so you can all live in peace. Leave our lands and you will live in peace. That’s all I have to say. Allah’s peace and blessings be upon Muhammad.”

Marilyn,
I reject your use of the word "our terrorism", Western Governments have long ceased to reflect the values of their constituents, there is no "we", there's only people like us and people like them. Nationalism is the answer to all the world's problems, Muslims need to live in their own free, neutral and independant homelands, Europeans in theirs, Asians in theirs and so on, abolish the U.N,NATO,ASEAN,G20 the E.U and all international treaties and all of this goes away.

Wars are started by interfering in others peoples business, accordingly be prepared that there will be consequences, for that action.

In the old testament of the bible there are numerous passages which encourage violence and killing, however, one of the ten commandments states that thou shalt not kill. I have often wondered how Christian soldiers live with this and why the leaders of all the Christian churches are not in the front ranks of anti war protest marches.
Does this mean that all who attend Christian churches endorse killing?

You have it all wrong, Mr Askari.

The 10 Commandments do not say "Thou shalt not kill", they say "Thou Shalt not Murder." This concept, observed by the Christian, Jewish and Muslim faiths, is taken to mean that God is saying that it permissible to kill with the sanction of legal authority, but not permissible to kill for personnel reasons.

The reason why Christians today are nowhere near as violent as Muslims, is because the two faiths are fundamentally different in origin. One was started by a Jewish hippie who advocated, peace, love, tolerance, and forgiveness, while the other was started by a genocidal warlord who concocted a religion that would make his soldiers fearless in battle, as well as justify his conquests.

That is why Christians did not go around rioting or promising to murder the artists and producers who created 'Piss Christ" and "The Life of Brian", but Salmon Rushdie is still on the run, and the editor of that Danish newspaper who published those Mohammad cartoons is in hiding.

In addition, if a Christian wishes to become a Muslim, there is no legal or religious law that prevents them for doing so. But in Islam, Sharia Law as practiced by the four major faiths of Islam specifies that apostates must be killed. I don't know about you, But I am personally incredulous that the Australian government would allow such a murderous and dangerous "religion" into an advanced society.

At the very least, out government should have demanded that this Muslim law be renounced by all Muslim branches before it could be tolerated to set up shop in Australia, and allowed to preach its misogyny and hatred of infidels here.

Dear Askari,

Please excuse LEGO for he knoweth not what he says.

Jesus said quite explicitly "I come not to bring peace, but to bring a sword" (Gospel of Matthew 10:34)

And the leader of one of the great Christian nations of the last century wrote in his book Mein Kampf “by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.”

Of course he did not always feel this way writing in Mein Kampf;

“Not until my fourteenth or fifteenth year did I begin to come across the word 'Jew,' with any frequency, partly in connection with political discussions .... For the Jew was still characterized for me by nothing but his religion, and therefore, on grounds of human tolerance, I maintained my rejection of religious attacks in this case as in others .... Consequently, the tone, particularly that of the Viennese anti-Semitic press, seemed to me unworthy of the cultural tradition of a great nation. I was not in agreement with the sharp anti-Semitic tone, but from time to time I read arguments which gave me some food for thought.”

It was only his radicalisation by Christian Dr. Karl Lueger, and the Christian Social Party, that changed him.

“How many of my basic principles were upset by this change in my attitude toward the Christian Social movement! My views with regard to anti-Semitism thus succumbed to the passage of time, and this was my greatest transformation of all.”

Christians not as violent as Muslims or prone to radicalising their young? Tell that to the millions of Holocaust victims.

Csteele,
Snap! Bringing forth Godwins law is considered trolling/ derailing on most reputable forums because it's an anti intellectual stance, we're talking about Islam, Hitler's views are irrelevant to this thread. Furthermore the "Holocaust" is purely a Jewish talking point, it has nothing to do with Islam, Australia, Britain or the failed cult of multiculturalism if you want to discuss Christianity and your theory on it's connection with the people who died in German custody in the National Socialist era please do it somewhere else.

Dear JOM,

My post was a direct answer to LEGO's nonsense. Further, radicalisation by religious figures is more than topical to what we are discussing, in fact I would have thought it pivotal.

And as an ardent nationalist of course you would be the first one here to get a little cranky about Hitler getting a bit of a touch up.

Tell you what though, if you are willing to retreat from this thread and take your soft, pernicious, nationalism somewhere else, I am more than happy to join you in relieving the rest of the posters of our pearls of wisdom.

Deal?

If not please put a plug in it.

Bill Calcutt and Marilyn Shepherd, there is no lack of clarity about the killers' political motives.
They specifically stated they wanted to "start a war in London tonight".
This was not "just another murder".

csteele,
You constantly misquote Jesus words,"I come not to bring peace, but to bring a sword" (Gospel of Matthew 10:34). Jesus lived in a society that was under Roman occupation and would kill by the sword anyone who would cause discention. He was not going to bow to god Caesar so that would not bring a peacful life it would bring Roman swords to those who would follow him. He rejected following Jewish sword carrying Zealots [Matthew 4]and the use of swords in his quote to Peter, "Those that live by the sword will die by the sword"[Matthew 26:52]. It is a pity you do not grasp the true character of Jesus but rather seek to denegrate him, which identifies your true deceitful character.

"This concept, observed by the Christian, Jewish and Muslim faiths, is taken to mean that God is saying that it permissible to kill with the sanction of legal authority, but not permissible to kill for personnel reasons."

According to Lego's theory, states can murder as much as they want, their head honchos just have to formalise it in law first.

Jay of Melbourne
Those claiming the right of the state to arbitrarily kill as many people as they want, need to answer to the immorality of their anti-human nonsense, Godwin's law or no.

Hi Mr Csteel. If you want to take a cheap shot at me, at least have the courtesy of directing your post at me. But I can understand your shyness. You had better have done your homework if you want to cross swords with me.

Since the Jewish man who claimed he was THE Jesus Christ did not carry a sword, never used a sword, never demanded a war, told his followers to "love thine enemies" and "turn the other cheek", and constantly proclaimed a pacifist message full of peace, love, and mung beans, it is reasonable to conclude that the words he spoke were metaphorical, and were simply suggesting that he had come to stir things up.

Your premise that "Christians" put six million Jews into gas chamber, so that proves that Christianity and Christians are violent, is an interesting premise.

It is based upon the assumption that almost all Nazis were practicing Christians. My own reading of history is something different. Armaments Minister Albert Speer recounted to allied interrogators after the war, that Hitler was contemptuous of Christianity BECAUSE of its inherent pacificism, and he praised Islam BECAUSE it was a warriors religion that was similar to the Old Norse pagan religion, that noted Nazis like Himmler and Goebbels were trying to resurrect in Germany. Furthermore, some of the inmates of the extermination camps were in fact Catholic Christian priests and Lutheran pastors who had openly and publically opposed Hitler and the Nazi party.

Of course, you could say that since most Germans were Christians and had supported Hitler, then Christianity was partially complicit in crimes against humanity. But since most of the Christians in the world at that time were fighting to destroy Nazism, then such a generalisation could be considered invalid. And you would have to apply that principle equally, and admit that since almost all of the terrorists in action today are Muslims, then the same standard must apply to Islam. Especially as Jihadis like Osama bin Laden are Islamic heroes and the most common name being bestowed on Muslim male babies today is 'Osama".

And if you wish to take a cheap shot at me also, Mr Jardine, could you also direct your post at me? Simply repeating what I said, making a sneey one liner reply, and looking around anxiously for support from others, is a poor substitute for a reasoned argument.

I think that you would do your cause a lot more good if you thought about what you were writing first, and thought out a considered rebuttal with possibly a bit of humour in it. That is better than simply acting outraged and writing the first bit of nonsense that comes into your head.

It is not my "theory" that the Commandment which states "Thou Shalt not Murder" means that this does justify the legal sanctioned killing of other human beings. Nor is it my "theory" that this does not sanction "Murder" (killing for personnel reasons) It is an interpretation which has been accepted for thousands of years by religious scholars of first the Hebrew faith, and later by Muslim and Christian religious scholars.

And for thousands of years, Mr Jardine, state sanctioned killing by authority has been the norm. The armed forces of every state for thousands of years have been armed with very lethal weapons, not with frying pans.

Every state in the world today has armed men backing up legal authority. The culture of these organisations are not only "Thou Shalt Kill", but "Great Woe Shall Betide Thee If Thou Dost Not"

Lego

you are dealing with a man (csteele) who deliberatley misrepresents the Christian faith while being an Islamic apologist. Unfortunately his type of dishonesty is mirrored by many of our pollies who actually hate the righteousness of Christ because it exposes their own unrighteousness. Secularism is a immoral cult that promotes death and disposes of the unborn like trash.

Thankyou for your informed reason in your posts here.

Lego
There are several different versions of the bible. The Catholic version uses the word Kill in the commandments and the Protestant version uses the word Murder.
The old testament can be used to justify just about anything if you search for a suitable quote, the new testament is all about love and forgiveness.
I think that the Koran can be used to justify anything but it also contains much about Peace and forgiveness.
A lot of Peace advocates have been killed, Jesus Christ, Gandhi, Martin Luther King and even John Lennon, it seems live a dangerous belief to have.
The signs are that unless humans learn to live at Peace with each other and with the rest of planet Earth then we will not live.

Hi, Mr Askari

If the Catholic Bible does indeed say "Thou Shalt Not Kill" , then the official the teachings of the Catholic church are even more pacifist than the prots. But unless the Pope has changed things since I studied history, Catholics are forbidden to read the Bible anyway. The Bible must be "interpreted" for them by their priests. The right of ordinary people to bypass the clergy and read the word of God directly from the Bible, was the primary reason for the Reformation.

That Reformation allowed literate people to read the pacifist commands of their prophet for the first time. This began the process of turning Christianity from a violent religion which was every bit as bad as Islam is today, to a religion where violence is frowned upon unless very good reasons exist justifying it.

This is completely different to Islam, where the violence towards non Muslims is commanded by Allah in the Koran, which Muslims believe is the literal word of God. And Islam has always encouraged its followers to be literate and read that direct message of hate and violence from Allah directly.

Muslims follow the teachings of the prophet Muhammad, and Christians follow the teachings of their prophet Jesus Christ. And there is nothing in Jesus Christs teachings to compare with Muhammads

We have created the unbelievers out of base matters.

Believers, take neither Jews nor Christians for your friends.

Do not be the first to greet a Jew or a Christian, and if you meet one of them in the street, then push him to the narrowest part of the way.” ....

“O you who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are close to you, and let them find harshness in you,

Prophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them,

Sura (2:216) - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not."