Russell Square stabbings: Man arrested on suspicion of murder

glen8 said:
They said on LBC, the new tactics now are the lone wolf types. Organising another 9/11 or 7/7 is almost impossible these days, but how can anyone stop a random stranger driving a car down a busy high street on a saturday afternoon.

Last week a sky news presenter got some heat for walking into a church and saying he could kill everyone.....actually he was right. He could.
Click to expand...

You can't very easily unfortunately... you may be able to find people who are at risk of becoming fanatics either by reporting from friends/relatives or by other means such as their online activity, communication with known radicals etc.. But really if someone with no contact simply reads, for example, Islamist material online and decides to do something as a result then there isn't much you can do. Likewise with people suffering from mental illness, some will act violently and unpredictably.
 
Hambut_Bulge said:
Not sure if this has been mentioned yet, but counter-terrorism officers are apparently concerned that ISIS are deliberately targeting those with mental-health issues as recruits.

Easier to brainwash I guess...

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/...ental_health_problems__terrorism_chiefs_warn/
Click to expand...

Yes they are indeed, have been for a while. The british have been very slow in communicating out that it's not actually down to religion. Most countries use the term Daesh, whereas we still say ISIS. They target the vulnerable to do their dirty work.
We still seem to group a certain type of people and tar them with the terrorism brush. It's not religion, they use that as an excuse.

The vast majority of muslims don't support Daesh (probably 99.9%). It's the 0.1% which go around shouting allah before hitting the button on their suicide vest. It's their aim to turn people against each other and cause chaos.
 
Last edited:
RaohNS said:
But you are aware then of US declassified requests by the Japanese.

I'm sorry but your post is entirely inaccurate:

www.ihr.org/jhr/v16/v16n3p-4_weber.html

Its all there and the evidence is based on US govt released information. Again if you don't believe that evidence, you'll need to take it up with the US govt.
Click to expand...

A position only entirely undermined by the fact that they didn't surrender after the first one.
 
glen8 said:
It's not religion, they use that as an excuse.
Click to expand...

Hardly and excuse... it is pretty fundamental to their cause. Though this is getting off topic as we don't know that this attacker had anything to do with IS or even radical Islam in general.
 
dowie said:
Hardly and excuse... it is pretty fundamental to their cause. Though this is getting off topic as we don't know that this attacker had anything to do with IS or even radical Islam in general.
Click to expand...

ok, but it's misguided and leads to everyone thinking the inevitable

Let's say I went on a rampage nailing people to crosses shouting "I'm doing the work for our lord Jesus christ". You don't want people of other faiths giving christians a funny look in the nail and timber section of B&Q.

They have a very warped view and I think, read into the koran whatever they like to justify whatever it is they do.

We are going off on a tangent though :D
 
If you’re going to program kids from birth to revere a 7th century warlord as the most perfect human ever, you might want to hope that child grows up to be perfectly well-adjusted and never faces any kind of adversity.
 
Stolly said:
A position only entirely undermined by the fact that they didn't surrender after the first one.
Click to expand...

Stolly... The US refused to accept surrender... They wanted surrender on the terms of unconditional surrender. The Japanese terms were exactly the same in regards to terms minus they wanted to preserve the Emperor... The US said nope.

You do know surrender can be refused yes?
 
Stolly said:
A position only entirely undermined by the fact that they didn't surrender after the first one.
Click to expand...

The two Bombs were dropped only 3 days apart, The Japanese didn't really fully appreciate that the destruction had been caused by a single bomb until after the second one.

Anyway, we are digressing somewhat.

The fact of the matter is that the Atomic Bombing of the Japanese Cities did constitute the deliberate mass killing of random innocent civilians for the purposes of generating Terror. (Even if there were other reasons for carrying out the attack as well)

IE Terrorism.

And the mass killing was planned and carried out by entirely sane and rational people.

So No, It is not something that only mentally ill people do.
 
Last edited:
Tefal said:
Good to see that all the islam comments being deleted yet disparaging stuff about the mentally ill remains.

"Non exhaustive list" my arse.
Click to expand...

Also regarding the media, the way "Mental Health" is being spoke about every time these kind of attacks happen then people are going to be scared of saying they have a mental health issue, this is going to put more of a stigma on mental health than there already is.

Media are bashing it out enough.

People are going to be only thinking terrorism = mental health the way this is going, most don't listen to the rest of the story\article, they just take those two terms from it.
 
Arazi said:
People are going to be only thinking terrorism = mental health the way this is going, most don't listen to the rest of the story\article, they just take those two terms from it.
Click to expand...

Well it seems some are going that way and others are going certain religion = Terrorism

Both equally as wrong.

As for the 'censorship'

Its just stupid posting random wiki facts about Somalia because the guy is Somalian. Lets wait for official details to be announced before guessing motive based on religion, based on his race. No matter how likely or unlikely it is, its still pre-judging based his racial origin. Pretty clear what rules the post broke.

Any news on the other injured?
 
dowie said:
here are a couple of articles

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blo...errorists-actually-terrorists-or-mentally-ill



http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/855849



For academic papers there is an overview of the literature here:

for example:

https://www.surrey.ac.uk/politics/r...mmeracademy/instructors /The Terrost mind.pdf




I think, so far, this view:



has no basis and is, as I already pointed out, naive.

Note I'm not denying that some terrorists do have mental illnesses, especially 'lone wolf' types (and quite frequently recent converts) but to make the above claim for *all* is very silly.



Why? Other than arbitrary legal definitions of a state are they necessarily radically different from soldiers fighting in war? You've not posted anything to differentiate them all certainly not to the point where you can make that claim for all of them. And you've had examples of conventional military forces carrying out mass killings, such as atomic bombings. Are we to assume that all Nazis also suffered from metal illness and perhaps the majority of Soviet troops in WW2... maybe most of the Bosnian Serb forces were mentally ill too in the 90s? Not to mention most men in Sierra Leone, Liberia and Rwanda.

It is very naive to blindly diagnoses 'mental illness' for *all* mass murderers.
Click to expand...

The (extremely limited, by their own admission) studies you linked to are looking for insanity. I am not talking about insanity, I am talking about mental health issues, including the very common sociopathy and psychopathy, which would include at the minimum an Antisocial Personality Disorder. Also delusion-related mental health issues, as with religious extremism.

If you are willing to kill multiple innocent people as a terrorist, then you almost certainly have one of the above conditions to some extent, and again, I do not include all actions/decisions taken in all wars in this bucket. However, considering Truman apparently expressed no regret after bombing Hiroshima, I would argue he also suffered from some of the above. Interesting article on that here http://www.takepart.com/article/2011/08/05/was-bombing-hiroshima-necessary-three-myths-debunked

Anyhow, we will just have to agree to disagree.
 
Last edited:
Zatoichi.uK said:
I'd say it was the person that carried out the attack that has defamed their religion rather than I, but noted.
Click to expand...

don't take it personally. ocuk forums have gotten quite a bad reputation over the past few months and the mods are doing what they can do sort it. When things calm down I'm sure they will be a bit more understanding. Sometimes posts get deleted which don't come close to breaking the rules, but it's just a case of getting things cleaned up as quickly as possible.
 
glen8 said:
The vast majority of muslims don't support Daesh (probably 99.9%). It's the 0.1% which go around shouting allah before hitting the button on their suicide vest. It's their aim to turn people against each other and cause chaos.
Click to expand...

This is what bugs me, if you are going to post numbers like that can you provide evidence because those numbers are utter BS.

Plus you say support above, how can you possibly know how many Muslims worldwide support ISIS\Taliban\Al Nusra etc etc, whatever flavour. Nobody can.

What is 1% of 1.6 Billion for example? Is the answer not extremely large?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom