Vienna Terrorist Attack

[AugustaHibs]

wtf is going on? Seems like at the moment there’s a new terrorist attack on the news. Awful for everyone involved

[Sir David Gray]

wtf is going on? Seems like at the moment there’s a new terrorist attack on the news. Awful for everyone involved

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/world-europe-54786952

One attacker dead, one on the run.

Attack near a synagogue.

Just horrific.

[Chorley Hibee]

Reports from Austria suggest several dead, including a police officer, after a coordinated attack in six different locations.

[AugustaHibs]

Reports from Austria suggest several dead, including a police officer, after a coordinated attack in six different locations.

Reminds me of the Paris attacks a couple years gack

[Sir David Gray]

Reports from Austria suggest several dead, including a police officer, after a coordinated attack in six different locations.

Absolutely despicable.

[Keith_M]

wtf is going on? Seems like at the moment there’s a new terrorist attack on the news. Awful for everyone involved


Yet more Islamic Terrorists. That's what's going on.


I used to go for the nights out in the district that the shooting occurred, which kind of brings it home to me. I've probably sat outside some of the pubs where the people were shot.

[Jones28]

Yet more Islamic Terrorists. That's what's going on.


I used to go for the nights out in the district that the shooting occurred, which kind of brings it home to me. I've probably sat outside some of the pubs where the people were shot.

Doesn't really matter what their religion is. Terrorists is the most important part.

[Keith_M]

Doesn't really matter what their religion is. Terrorists is the most important part.


Aw come on.

Islamic extremists are responsible for the majority of terrorist attacks nowadays and the number of occurrences seems to be increasing.

I get that this has little to do with ordinary, decent Muslims in our community but I'm not going to pretend there's no link between the nutters themselves, and that's their interpretation of Islam... which is their whole motivation for committing atrocities.

[Pretty Boy]

Doesn't really matter what their religion is. Terrorists is the most important part.

It does matter though.

I posted a lengthy opinion on the thread about the recent Paris attacks about not viewing Islam in a way that is exusively influenced by those who carry out terrorist acts. Equally though I don't think dismissing the Islamist element is the correct course either. The radicalisation of predominantly young men is a multi faceted issue and a twisted interpretation of Islamic scripture and teachings is one of the key weapons those doing the indoctrinating have.

[Jones28]

Aw come on.

Islamic extremists are responsible for the majority of terrorist attacks nowadays and the number of occurrences seems to be increasing.

I get that this has little to do with ordinary, decent Muslims in our community but I'm not going to pretend there's no link between the nutters themselves, and that's their interpretation of Islam... which is their whole motivation for committing atrocities.


It does matter though.

I posted a lengthy opinion on the thread about the recent Paris attacks about not viewing Islam in a way that is exusively influenced by those who carry out terrorist acts. Equally though I don't think dismissing the Islamist element is the correct course either. The radicalisation of predominantly young men is a multi faceted issue and a twisted interpretation of Islamic scripture and teachings is one of the key weapons those doing the indoctrinating have.


I don't disagree but I also don't think it's something that should be discussed in the immediate aftermath of this kind of atrocity, what good does it do other than vilify a whole section of society?

It's a complicated issue and it is to do with the twisting of scripture but it's not because of Islam that these things happen, it's more to do with the way the people who do it are indoctrinated.

[Keith_M]

I don't disagree but I also don't think it's something that should be discussed in the immediate aftermath of this kind of atrocity, what good does it do other than vilify a whole section of society?

It's a complicated issue and it is to do with the twisting of scripture but it's not because of Islam that these things happen, it's more to do with the way the people who do it are indoctrinated.



I have two friends who are gay. I'd fear for their safety... even their lives... if they lived in many of the majority Muslim countries.

I have colleagues who would be locked up, or even executed, for simply exercising their religions in those countries.


Yes, terrorism is limited to a tiny number of people and they have an even more extreme view of their holy scriptures.

Yes, I also believe I should stick to my values of tolerance and acceptance to people no matter what religion they are (and I genuinely do), and I abhor people that act with prejudice towards someone based on their faith.


But I'm still extremely troubled by the actions of certain religions in practice, when unrestrained by external factors, which makes me question the claims of a peace loving and open faith.


For some balance: My opinion on the older Christian religions is that they once were exactly the same, and have largely been dragged, kicking and screaming, into the modern world by external influences beyond their control. They have been reactive, not pro-active, when it comes to making any progress.

[AugustaHibs]

I have two friends who are gay. I'd fear for their safety... even their lives... if they lived in many of the majority Muslim countries.

I have colleagues who would be locked up, or even executed, for simply exercising their religions in those countries.


Yes, terrorism is limited to a tiny number of people and they have an even more extreme view of their holy scriptures.

Yes, I also believe I should stick to my values of tolerance and acceptance to people no matter what religion they are (and I genuinely do), and I abhor people that act with prejudice towards someone based on their faith.


But I'm still extremely troubled by the actions of certain religions in practice, when unrestrained by external factors, which makes me question the claims of a peace loving and open faith.


My opinion on the older Christian religions is that they once were exactly the same, and have been largely been dragged, kicking and screaming, into the modern world by external influences beyond their control. They have been reactive, not pro-active, when it comes to making any progress.

Spot on. Some religions have more problems than others

[Sir David Gray]

I don't disagree but I also don't think it's something that should be discussed in the immediate aftermath of this kind of atrocity, what good does it do other than vilify a whole section of society?

It's a complicated issue and it is to do with the twisting of scripture but it's not because of Islam that these things happen, it's more to do with the way the people who do it are indoctrinated.

When is a convenient time to discuss it then? In 3 weeks, in 3 months, 3 years even? After countless other innocent people have been stabbed, shot and beheaded at the hands of these evil people?

Of course there are people who choose to vilify an entire section of society after attacks like this and that's entirely wrong. However these people get their inspiration from reading the Qur'an and twisting the teachings that they read about in the Qur'an in order to fit into their agenda which allows them to justify these attacks. They still follow the Islamic faith - they are Muslims just like the members of the Westboro Baptist Church are Christians.

It may be an uncomfortable fact for a lot of people in this country to come to terms with, well meaning people who don't want to be seen to be offending anyone, but being in complete denial about the existence of Islamic terrorism is extremely unhelpful and actually damaging to the efforts to try and tackle this issue.

[Jones28]

When is a convenient time to discuss it then? In 3 weeks, in 3 months, 3 years even? After countless other innocent people have been stabbed, shot and beheaded at the hands of these evil people?

Of course there are people who choose to vilify an entire section of society after attacks like this and that's entirely wrong. However these people get their inspiration from reading the Qur'an and twisting the teachings that they read about in the Qur'an in order to fit into their agenda which allows them to justify these attacks. They still follow the Islamic faith - they are Muslims just like the members of the Westboro Baptist Church are Christians.

It may be an uncomfortable fact for a lot of people in this country to come to terms with, well meaning people who don't want to be seen to be offending anyone, but being in complete denial about the existence of Islamic terrorism is extremely unhelpful and actually damaging to the efforts to try and tackle this issue.

I'm just saying keep the religion out of it within 12 hours of the attacks happening, is that unreasonable?

[Pretty Boy]

I think if you practice your religion then you simply can't 'other' the elements within it that are inconvenient. In normal times I attend Mass at least once a week and, probably much to the amusement of many, find it a rewarding and moving experience. There are many aspects of the teachings of the Church which I find uncomfortable and actively disagree with but I can't distance myself from them because it's distasteful to me personally. The hurt caused to gay people because their parents refused to accept them for who they were, people being denied the sacraments for the crime of refusing to remain in an unhappy marriage and then cementing that by falling in love again, the intimidation of women at abortion clinics, child abuse and the horror stories of the childrens homes in Ireland are just some of the things that didn't happen in spite of people's Catholic faith, they happened because of it. I have often argued with more traditionalist Catholics and they are immovable in their beliefs. They will argue that we shouldn't be swayed by the desires to be happy in this world and they are focused on saving souls for the next world. How do you argue against that?

Equally the Christian right in the US is hugely influential not just because of their political ideology. Their Bible literlaism and fundamentalist interpretation of scripture shapes that ideology. In a country in which various polls suggest there is actually a majority of liberally minded people these groups hold disproportionate sway. As an example they play a huge part in shaping the US policy towards Israel. Their steadfast belief in the covenant with God and the requirement to rebuild the temple is front and centre among many of the evangelical Protestant denominations in the US in a way it isn't with Catholicism and Orthodoxy. For them acting against Israel isn't just acting against a traditional ally but acting against God and his will. Good luck being a politician and negotiating that minefield.

Islamic terrorism exists and the religious element is wholly relevant. If over a billion Muslims can interpret their faith and act on it peacefully then it's all the more important to determine how and why the extremists have made their interpretation so appealing to a minority. We can't other the terrorists, they are acting because of their religion, not in spite of it.

[Sir David Gray]

I'm just saying keep the religion out of it within 12 hours of the attacks happening, is that unreasonable?

Yes I'd say it is when it's been the whole motive and justification for the attack.

Europe has a huge problem with Islamic extremism, ignoring it and hoping it will go away isn't going to solve anything and will only make matters worse.

[Jones28]

Yes I'd say it is when it's been the whole motive and justification for the attack.

Europe has a huge problem with Islamic extremism, ignoring it and hoping it will go away isn't going to solve anything and will only make matters worse.

FFS thats not what I'm saying. Who's ignoring it? Not me, I'm just saying it doesn't need to be discussed within 12 hours of the incident.

[Sylar]

I don't disagree but I also don't think it's something that should be discussed in the immediate aftermath of this kind of atrocity, what good does it do other than vilify a whole section of society?

It's a complicated issue and it is to do with the twisting of scripture but it's not because of Islam that these things happen, it's more to do with the way the people who do it are indoctrinated.

I'll provide you with some element of support here, as much as others critiquing you do make some reasonable points.

When I lived and worked down in Guildford, I was an honorary member of our University's student Iranian Society - I supervised 2 PhD students who were Iranian and they played football every Sunday so I got to be friends with a large group of Iranian muslims. During that time, the beheading of Lee Rigby took place and the anti-Islamic rhetoric really ramped up. They were genuinely fearful because of the intense onslaught in the media and the rise in prominence of groups like the EDL and Britain First in response to such attrocities. The media weaponise these events by tarring an entire global community of almost 2 billion people with the same brush. There is definitely a case for investigating WHY so many within the Islamic faith are drawn to extreme viewpoints, but in the immediate fallout when anxieties are already sky-high is probably not the optimal time to discuss it.

[Sir David Gray]

FFS thats not what I'm saying. Who's ignoring it? Not me, I'm just saying it doesn't need to be discussed within 12 hours of the incident.

Apologies I must have misinterpreted your "Doesn't really matter what their religion is" post.

[Jones28]

Apologies I must have misinterpreted your "Doesn't really matter what their religion is" post.

I said the religious aspect doesn't matter at this moment in time, not that it should never be discussed. That might be my fault for my initial post but I made that very clear in the subsequent replies - including to you.

[The 90+2]

I said the religious aspect doesn't matter at this moment in time, not that it should never be discussed. That might be my fault for my initial post but I made that very clear in the subsequent replies - including to you.

I’m sure it mattered to the cowardly murdering *******s though.

[Jones28]

I’m sure it mattered to the cowardly murdering *******s though.

Did it matter to the victims? Or their families? Who are probably a bit pre-occupied at this moment in time.

[The 90+2]

Did it matter to the victims? Or their families? Who are probably a bit pre-occupied at this moment in time.

It probably does tbh. I know it would matter to me if one of my family was killed because of religious hate.

[Hibrandenburg]

Have we learnt nothing from the past? Yes we have a real and current danger from radical Islamists. But similar to our past problems with radical Irish Republicans, the more knee jerk the reaction directly after terrorist attacks the more ordinary Muslim people will be alienated from mainstream society and the more extremists will be drawn from their ranks. That is the whole strategy behind these attacks, to divide society along the lines they want to draw and on their terms. This isn't a struggle between Christianity and Islam, it's a struggle between those who want a culture war and those who want peace, thankfully the vast majority of both cultures want the latter but the terrorists aim is to break that status quo. They want us to over react, it's why they do what they do.

[Sir David Gray]

I said the religious aspect doesn't matter at this moment in time, not that it should never be discussed. That might be my fault for my initial post but I made that very clear in the subsequent replies - including to you.

I'll respectfully disagree.

[Jones28]

I'll respectfully disagree.

Your call

[Jones28]

I'll provide you with some element of support here, as much as others critiquing you do make some reasonable points.

When I lived and worked down in Guildford, I was an honorary member of our University's student Iranian Society - I supervised 2 PhD students who were Iranian and they played football every Sunday so I got to be friends with a large group of Iranian muslims. During that time, the beheading of Lee Rigby took place and the anti-Islamic rhetoric really ramped up. They were genuinely fearful because of the intense onslaught in the media and the rise in prominence of groups like the EDL and Britain First in response to such attrocities. The media weaponise these events by tarring an entire global community of almost 2 billion people with the same brush. There is definitely a case for investigating WHY so many within the Islamic faith are drawn to extreme viewpoints, but in the immediate fallout when anxieties are already sky-high is probably not the optimal time to discuss it.

Great post. :aok:

[One Day Soon]

Have we learnt nothing from the past? Yes we have a real and current danger from radical Islamists. But similar to our past problems with radical Irish Republicans, the more knee jerk the reaction directly after terrorist attacks the more ordinary Muslim people will be alienated from mainstream society and the more extremists will be drawn from their ranks. That is the whole strategy behind these attacks, to divide society along the lines they want to draw and on their terms. This isn't a struggle between Christianity and Islam, it's a struggle between those who want a culture war and those who want peace, thankfully the vast majority of both cultures want the latter but the terrorists aim is to break that status quo. They want us to over react, it's why they do what they do.


Completely agree. The most effective weapon in combatting Islamic terrorism whether homegrown or external is tackling poverty. Dramatically increase educational opportunity and economic prosperity and you have what is close to a vaccine against fundamentalism and its ability to recruit from ignorance, fear and want.

[Keith_M]

OK, I take on board the comment about discussing religion immediately after a terrorist attack, so I'm going to stay off the topic for now.


In general, I think it's a valid discussion but one that's normally avoided, probably due to the rather extreme viewpoints of many people (like Yaxley-Lennon).

[Jones28]

OK, I take on board the comment about discussing religion immediately after a terrorist attack, so I'm going to stay off the topic for now.


In general, I think it's a valid discussion but one that's normally avoided, probably due to the rather extreme viewpoints of many people (like Yaxley-Lennon).


:agree: it absolutely has it's place.

[Sir David Gray]

OK, I take on board the comment about discussing religion immediately after a terrorist attack, so I'm going to stay off the topic for now.


In general, I think it's a valid discussion but one that's normally avoided, probably due to the rather extreme viewpoints of many people (like Yaxley-Lennon).

It absolutely is a valid discussion and just because there's people on the extreme opposite end of the scale who take advantage of such attacks to further their own warped agenda and twisted view of the world should not mean that it's off limits to discuss the fundamental basis of these attacks.

When attacks from far right extremists have happened, like Anders Behring Breivik, Brenton Tarrant and Darren Osborne, we don't have such a discussion about whether we should refrain from mentioning the motives which may have been behind them and worry about angry Muslims rising up in retaliation against innocent white people.

We rightly establish the facts and then call these people out for what they are which is white supremacist terrorists who are driven by a twisted ideology and who murder innocent people.

There's no reason for treating attacks from Islamic extremists any differently.

[Hibrandenburg]

It absolutely is a valid discussion and just because there's people on the extreme opposite end of the scale who take advantage of such attacks to further their own warped agenda and twisted view of the world should not mean that it's off limits to discuss the fundamental basis of these attacks.

When attacks from far right extremists have happened, like Anders Behring Breivik, Brenton Tarrant and Darren Osborne, we don't have such a discussion about whether we should refrain from mentioning the motives which may have been behind them and worry about angry Muslims rising up in retaliation against innocent white people.

We rightly establish the facts and then call these people out for what they are which is white supremacist terrorists who are driven by a twisted ideology and who murder innocent people.

There's no reason for treating attacks from Islamic extremists any differently.

Did you sense any feelings of being held at least partly responsible for events immediately after the right wing nutjobs you mentioned carried out their attacks?

[Keith_M]

Has anybody seen any news updates on whether there actually was more than one person involved, i.e. the others are still on the loose?

:dunno:


The reports I've read so far, the Police didn't seem sure either way.

[Vault Boy]

It's always devastating to read about more senseless loss of life, far too regular an occurrence.

I agree that it's important to label extremism for what it is. Jihadi terrorism, far right terrorism, sectarian terrorism, whatever it might be.

Most reasonable folk can make the distinction between a global religion of nearly 2bn, and its extremist minority, who are a scurge on Islam. Most of the victims of Islamic terror are Muslims themselves, so I must imagine that they, as much as any other group, are desperate to see an end to it.

My main hope lies with the increasing number of young, secular, liberal minded Arabs growing up in the region. Reason, democracy, and liberty saw the end of the European dark ages. We might just see a similar solution helping to eventually eradicate anti-scientific, ultra-Conservative, theocratic dictatorships and monarchies in the Middle East.

[Sir David Gray]

Did you sense any feelings of being held at least partly responsible for events immediately after the right wing nutjobs you mentioned carried out their attacks?

No and neither should any Muslim who has no links or involvement with terrorism be held responsible for attacks attributed to Islamic terrorism.

I don't see how it's helpful to delay or even completely fail to address the fact that these attacks are motivated by an extreme version of Islam.

I actually think that what many people mean when they say that we should wait before bringing up the discussion that the terrorism is linked to an extreme form of Islam is that we really shouldn't discuss it at all, that it's too uncomfortable to discuss and we cannot risk offending anyone. Let's just brand them all as bad people without actually getting to the bottom of what motivates them to be bad people.

The overwhelming majority of Muslims who reject this extreme branch of their religion should embrace this subject being brought up as I'm sure they want rid of this poisonous element just as much as anyone - possibly even moreso given that the majority of the victims of such attacks across the world are Muslims themselves.

[Vault Boy]

Britain's terrorism threat level raised to severe, as you'd expect.