Manchester bomber's mother reported him and police did nothing

[VillageContractor]

Maybe don't try to control their entire life with fail religion ? Maybe stop punishiing ex-muslims with beheading ? maybe stop stoning, wearing burqas, going to church 5 times a day. etc etc etc etc etc etc the list is huge

It's their choice how they live their life so why are you trying to control them? Why can't they go to the mosque? Why can't they have a belief? Let them wear what they want!

People don't all have to think like you?

[contractorinatractor]

Why do people continually refer to people murdering (it's not yet definitively a proven link to any terrorist organisation, by the way - and don't go pasting me DailyMail crap) in the name of 'Muslim' and 'Islam'?

The KKK claim to be Christians. They aren't Christians. I have plenty of friends who happen to believe in Allah; their own choice of God. They aren't terrorists. The Quran isn't taken literally by the 99% of Muslims, and the same applies to Christians. You only have to look at the extreme far right so-called 'Christian' groups to understand they aren't Christian.

You kill other persons? You're not Chistian/Muslim/Sikh/<insert religion>. To be clear: you can't kill others and follow any major religion. The small amount of Imams (and not Mosques) teaching this to an extremely select few are likely basing it on Western aggression and the destruction of innocents abroad. From this angle, it is understandable - but NOT excusable - that dis-empowered people, if they have the opportunity, could consider the only way they can to attack the Western governments who have destroyed millions of innocent lives over the past few decades in places which happen to have a large Muslim following. For example, if you were an Iraqi, with scores of dead family and relatives, potential mental illness and vulnerable to psychological persuasion by a rogue Imam - who can say they would absolutely not be subject to that manipulation and result? Especially as a child seeing such trauma daily, growing into adulthood with skewed views of why those innocent deaths occurred in the first place.

Before amateur arm-chair DailyMail copy/pasters start quoting any religious text, we can surely agree the majority of all religions are not mentally unsound and are not committing murder or terrorist acts. The model of governance in the majority of Muslim countries is such that they have huge amounts of personal freedom centuries to catch up with us in the West.

Christians HAVE killed people in the name of God, but just not that many recently. Prior to seventy years ago it was commonplace, and the further you go back in history the more you see that it was accepted, in the name of the religion of whatever society you view.

Yes, I'm saying our culture is more advanced, and therefore the people born link current societal morals to the religion they choose - if at all - to follow. If this conversation was a couple of hundred years ago, the current comments being said of Islam could apply to Christianity.

[northernladyuk]

To be clear: you can't kill others and follow any major religion.

So soldiers cannot be seen as following religion? Or do you need to be more specific about different types of killing?

[Pip in a Poke]

Why do people continually refer to people murdering (it's not yet definitively a proven link to any terrorist organisation, by the way - and don't go pasting me DailyMail crap) in the name of 'Muslim' and 'Islam'?

The KKK claim to be Christians. They aren't Christians. I have plenty of friends who happen to believe in Allah; their own choice of God. They aren't terrorists. The Quran isn't taken literally by the 99% of Muslims, and the same applies to Christians. You only have to look at the extreme far right so-called 'Christian' groups to understand they aren't Christian.

You kill other persons? You're not Chistian/Muslim/Sikh/<insert religion>. To be clear: you can't kill others and follow any major religion. The small amount of Imams (and not Mosques) teaching this to an extremely select few are likely basing it on Western aggression and the destruction of innocents abroad. From this angle, it is understandable - but NOT excusable - that dis-empowered people, if they have the opportunity, could consider the only way they can to attack the Western governments who have destroyed millions of innocent lives over the past few decades in places which happen to have a large Muslim following. For example, if you were an Iraqi, with scores of dead family and relatives, potential mental illness and vulnerable to psychological persuasion by a rogue Imam - who can say they would absolutely not be subject to that manipulation and result? Especially as a child seeing such trauma daily, growing into adulthood with skewed views of why those innocent deaths occurred in the first place.

Before amateur arm-chair DailyMail copy/pasters start quoting any religious text, we can surely agree the majority of all religions are not mentally unsound and are not committing murder or terrorist acts. The model of governance in the majority of Muslim countries is such that they have huge amounts of personal freedom centuries to catch up with us in the West.

Christians HAVE killed people in the name of God, but just not that many recently. Prior to seventy years ago it was commonplace, and the further you go back in history the more you see that it was accepted, in the name of the religion of whatever society you view.

Yes, I'm saying our culture is more advanced, and therefore the people born link current societal morals to the religion they choose - if at all - to follow. If this conversation was a couple of hundred years ago, the current comments being said of Islam could apply to Christianity.

Doesn't sound like you've spent much time in a tractor

[northernladyuk]

It's their choice how they live their life so why are you trying to control them? Why can't they go to the mosque? Why can't they have a belief? Let them wear what they want!

People don't all have to think like you?

But leave out the beheading and stoning.

[Paddy]

Why do people continually refer to people murdering (it's not yet definitively a proven link to any terrorist organisation, by the way - and don't go pasting me DailyMail crap) in the name of 'Muslim' and 'Islam'?

The KKK claim to be Christians. They aren't Christians. I have plenty of friends who happen to believe in Allah; their own choice of God. They aren't terrorists. The Quran isn't taken literally by the 99% of Muslims, and the same applies to Christians. You only have to look at the extreme far right so-called 'Christian' groups to understand they aren't Christian.

You kill other persons? You're not Chistian/Muslim/Sikh/<insert religion>

Before amateur arm-chair DailyMail copy/pasters start quoting any religious text, we can surely agree the majority of all religions are not mentally unsound and are not committing murder or terrorist acts. The model of governance in the majority of Muslim countries is such that they have huge amounts of personal freedom centuries to catch up with us in the West.

Christians HAVE killed people in the name of God, but just not that many recently. Prior to seventy years ago it was commonplace, and the further you go back in history the more you see that it was accepted, in the name of the religion of whatever society you view.

Yes, I'm saying our culture is more advanced, and therefore the people born link current societal morals to the religion they choose - if at all - to follow. If this conversation was a couple of hundred years ago, the current comments being said of Islam could apply to Christianity.

You are so wrong...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yXqwUxyKYw&t=27s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yyiyRSHAlds

etc etc etc

[diseasex]

Why do people continually refer to people murdering (it's not yet definitively a proven link to any terrorist organisation, by the way - and don't go pasting me DailyMail crap) in the name of 'Muslim' and 'Islam'?

The KKK claim to be Christians. They aren't Christians. I have plenty of friends who happen to believe in Allah; their own choice of God. They aren't terrorists. The Quran isn't taken literally by the 99% of Muslims, and the same applies to Christians. You only have to look at the extreme far right so-called 'Christian' groups to understand they aren't Christian.

You kill other persons? You're not Chistian/Muslim/Sikh/<insert religion>. To be clear: you can't kill others and follow any major religion. The small amount of Imams (and not Mosques) teaching this to an extremely select few are likely basing it on Western aggression and the destruction of innocents abroad. From this angle, it is understandable - but NOT excusable - that dis-empowered people, if they have the opportunity, could consider the only way they can to attack the Western governments who have destroyed millions of innocent lives over the past few decades in places which happen to have a large Muslim following. For example, if you were an Iraqi, with scores of dead family and relatives, potential mental illness and vulnerable to psychological persuasion by a rogue Imam - who can say they would absolutely not be subject to that manipulation and result? Especially as a child seeing such trauma daily, growing into adulthood with skewed views of why those innocent deaths occurred in the first place.

Before amateur arm-chair DailyMail copy/pasters start quoting any religious text, we can surely agree the majority of all religions are not mentally unsound and are not committing murder or terrorist acts. The model of governance in the majority of Muslim countries is such that they have huge amounts of personal freedom centuries to catch up with us in the West.

Christians HAVE killed people in the name of God, but just not that many recently. Prior to seventy years ago it was commonplace, and the further you go back in history the more you see that it was accepted, in the name of the religion of whatever society you view.

Yes, I'm saying our culture is more advanced, and therefore the people born link current societal morals to the religion they choose - if at all - to follow. If this conversation was a couple of hundred years ago, the current comments being said of Islam could apply to Christianity.

Didn't you say there's 1.8 billions of muslims ? That 1% gives whooping 18m of muslism that take it literally! that's even worse than I thought in terms of numbers. And new wave will come in next generations that take it literally. and over and over again. As it goes for decades of terrorism

Theres also bllions of christians, but 0 attacks. So whats wrong ?

[northernladyuk]

Didn't you say there's 1.8 billions of muslims ? That 1% gives whooping 18m of muslism that take it literally! that's even worse than I thought in terms of numbers. And new wave will come in next generations that take it literally. and over and over again. As it goes for decades of terrorism

Theres also bllions of christians, but 0 attacks. So whats wrong ?

Firstly, taking the Koran literally does not equate to terrorist.

Secondly, there are not many Christian extremist attacks but they are not unheard of.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christi...m#Contemporary

[contractorinatractor]

So soldiers cannot be seen as following religion? Or do you need to be more specific about different types of killing?

The protestant Christian churches I've been in and discussed such in the past squirm at these questions. Idealistically: yes, it's not possible to kill anybody else. I think most reasonable people would say that killing an attacker or someone in the act of trying to harm others is acceptable. Although, depending on the attack, it does seem better to shoot-to-maim than kill, as at least the attacker can be detained for life.

[diseasex]

Firstly, taking the Koran literally does not equate to terrorist.

Secondly, there are not many Christian extremist attacks but they are not unheard of.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christi...m#Contemporary

what a piece of bollocks