Does the panel think that this will make it more difficult for the terrorists?
I certainly hope so. Fight 93 made the take-over highjacking of plans exponentially more difficult, since passengers would no longer sit passively under the assumption that it would lead to a better outcome than would resistance. Maybe a more active, belligerent population who are willing to disrupt terrorists at their work will make the drive-by stabbings we've seen lately less attractive. But every tactical responses has to expect an adaptation on the part of the enemy, terrorists will find new ways, or reinvent old ways, of causing terror. It is what they do.
Or will it just lead to vigilantes stringing up people on suspicion of being Muslim? Or beating them up for walking around with an offensive Hijab on?
I think every population has its breaking point. I don't think we are close to that in the US. I doubt you are any closer in the UK. But civility and tolerance have to gain people something. If all they get from their elected leaders are
( ... )
It may make it more difficult for knife attacks by terrorists on foot - but that's about it (and if a high body count is any kind of priority for them, that will never be the most popular method).
Or will it just lead to vigilantes stringing up people on suspicion of being Muslim? Or beating them up for walking around with an offensive Hijab on?
I think the sooner this kind of worry comes after every attack, the worse it is for Islam (from a PR standpoint). Mentioning Islamophobia before the blood dries and the bodies are identified isn't going to help Islam in the long run (or the short run either, in my opinion).
Maybe the far right (round 'em up, outlaw 'em, ban 'em) and far left (they are a religion of peace, do not criticize) opinions are the loudest, but I don't think they represent a majority (no polls or evidence to back that up, just a hunch). I think most are tolerant, but that tolerance isn't absolute - it's conditional.
I'm quite glad guns are difficult to get hold of over here. Even a chair is defence against a knife, if you see what I mean. Shock and surprise will only get them so far, then it's the flash-mob lynching from there on in. Then the fake suicide vests become real ones, and the body counts climb...
And then the vile Katie Hopkins becomes Chancellor Prime Minister and the camps open...
Hopefully not in this universe.
I think Islam isn't a religion of peace. Of all the world's religions only Jainism and Buddhism are that. And not all versions of Buddhism either. Some forms of Christianity stress the "turn the other cheek" aspect of Christianity, but not that many. Religions are always at war with heresy, or paganism, or sex, or other things they don't like. They ain't really peaceable.
It's possible in this universe. Like I said, I think most tolerance is conditional. If we're talking about choosing between a left candidate that wants to pat Islam on the back and reassure them they haven't done anything wrong - and any other option - even one that seems vile at this point - it isn't just possible, it's likely. If the prevailing ideologies won't bend, the people will bend - towards the one that at least appears to balance things out.
Comments 6
I certainly hope so. Fight 93 made the take-over highjacking of plans exponentially more difficult, since passengers would no longer sit passively under the assumption that it would lead to a better outcome than would resistance. Maybe a more active, belligerent population who are willing to disrupt terrorists at their work will make the drive-by stabbings we've seen lately less attractive. But every tactical responses has to expect an adaptation on the part of the enemy, terrorists will find new ways, or reinvent old ways, of causing terror. It is what they do.
Or will it just lead to vigilantes stringing up people on suspicion of being Muslim? Or beating them up for walking around with an offensive Hijab on?
I think every population has its breaking point. I don't think we are close to that in the US. I doubt you are any closer in the UK. But civility and tolerance have to gain people something. If all they get from their elected leaders are ( ... )
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
Or will it just lead to vigilantes stringing up people on suspicion of being Muslim? Or beating them up for walking around with an offensive Hijab on?
I think the sooner this kind of worry comes after every attack, the worse it is for Islam (from a PR standpoint). Mentioning Islamophobia before the blood dries and the bodies are identified isn't going to help Islam in the long run (or the short run either, in my opinion).
Maybe the far right (round 'em up, outlaw 'em, ban 'em) and far left (they are a religion of peace, do not criticize) opinions are the loudest, but I don't think they represent a majority (no polls or evidence to back that up, just a hunch). I think most are tolerant, but that tolerance isn't absolute - it's conditional.
Reply
And then the vile Katie Hopkins becomes Chancellor Prime Minister and the camps open...
Hopefully not in this universe.
I think Islam isn't a religion of peace. Of all the world's religions only Jainism and Buddhism are that. And not all versions of Buddhism either. Some forms of Christianity stress the "turn the other cheek" aspect of Christianity, but not that many. Religions are always at war with heresy, or paganism, or sex, or other things they don't like. They ain't really peaceable.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment