Originally Posted by Charismatic

To save time in future:
“Obviously it's a horrific crime that's was perpetrated in <place name here> at <time of day>. At this time our thoughts are with the <insert number of people killed> families that have had the most loved and cherished people from their lives as well as the <insert number of people injured> who are still receiving medical treatment and care. I’m sure members of the police and security services will be working very closely with the <religion name here> community to fully investigate relevant matters and bring some very small number of individuals to account through the judicial system.

We would ask people to remain calm at this difficult time and remind people that respect for and tolerance for the causes of violence is of the utmost importance to our society. We hypothesis that this will ultimately somehow lead to less violence despite recent evidence to the contrary.”

We can polish it up over the next few years...or centuries. Depending on how long it takes society to get over religion.

Originally Posted by BEVS

Yes. Same this end. Two young ladies at the concert but finally home safe.
One being hassled via media messaging to give an interview. Both not in a good head space at all but safe and sound.

No words really. Sad pointless loss of lives yet again.

Originally Posted by Amazulu

Choices are going to have to be made - there will be a reckoning

Originally Posted by macliam

Firstly, kimilseung, Maajid Nawaz says many interesting things, but he's a nice, British-born, middle-class guy who has made a career out of anti-Islamist activities. The term "regressive left" suggests people who excuse Islamism, not Islam - so your suggestion that I might be so described just shows the danger of assuming things about someone you don't know.

I have lived in a muslim country and I met young men who had gone on the Green March in Morocco, not as royalists but under the green flag of Islam, "radicalised" by salafist teachings of the new Saudi-funded Mosques. Their venom against the west shocked me and was a contrast to the people around them - I remember being taken aback that a nationalist republican could be lumped in with those I considered to be my oppressors. Well, they've now had 40 years and a few wars to harden their attitudes. So I'm not particularly interested in an intellectual crusade against organised religion and I don't understand the mechanism of radicalization, but I do have concerns at the vehemence of radicals and islamophobes who don't need much excuse to hate. It is not the radicals who will suffer, it is the innocents who are easier to attack.

Secondly, and by extension, I refuse to accept the wholesale condemnation of a set of beliefs, based on the interpretation of a non-believer. I am happy to argue against specifics and have done so, but I will not generalise. Where such condemnation becomes more than an intellectual exercise is when it offers succour to those seeking support for hatred - and that is the current climate. Arguing semantics with someone who can't tell a sikh from a muslim is unlikely to have a positive outcome.

Thirdly, Leslie, thank you for your patronising post. You are correct, I do not know you and you do not know me. I am indeed a product of my experiences, as are we all, and I have been lucky to travel and meet people who helped me. I have known Christians from Syria, Jews from Iraq and even a Zoroastrian from Iran, whose families lived under Islam for centuries until things changed in the late C20th and a corrupted secular or islamist ideology replaced the more tolerant form and made life impossible for them. I neither support nor condone the actions of radical Islam, neither do I accept those of craw-thumping fundamentalist Christians or Zionists, or Hindus or secularists - but I will not close my eyes whilst an entire community is condemned solely on the basis of their beliefs, or whilst support for that condemnation is offered by accident or design..

The most regressive form of Islam is that which has been spread worldwide in the salafist mosques funded by Saudi Arabia. This is the cancer that has infected the entire religion of Islam and combined with anti-imperialist feeling to produce the current situation. Yet now we see Trump cosying up to the Saudis against Iran, fuelling the intra-Islam struggle between Sunni and Shi'ia. It will all end in tears.

This is a far cry from the horrible events in Manchester, where innocents of all religions or none had their lives snuffed out by someone who did not think them worth consideration. Whatever the reason for the attack, I condemn utterly the cowardly, criminal actions of the perpetrator. If he was radicalized and supported daesh, al quaeda or any other islamist group, then I can only echo the words of someone from the Leytonstone attack "You ain't no muslim, bruv", but further, you ain't no human either.

Now I'll leave you to get on with your private conversations..... enjoy.

Originally Posted by OzTennis

(not directly on Manchester but since you raise Trump) Is this the same Trump who previously condemned SA as evil, responsible for most of the 9/11 bombers, shouldn't be allowed to export oil to the US, repressive regime etc who he just signed the biggest arms deal in history with? To add to possible collusion with Russia we now have the likelihood that the US will be implicated in future war crimes committed by SA with US weapons. Is this the same Trump whose failing businesses were refloated with Muslim cash more than once? Rather than not buy their oil, taking their oil revenues for US weapons is the way to break that principle in a Trump principled way! They'll never implicate the US in war crimes also; we didn't know what they would use our supplies for. If anyone accuses me of anything or tries to pin anything on me I'll sack them as well and if they can't find any proof for what I tweet about Obama and Clinton I'll sack them as well. That Trump?

Originally Posted by DeadVim

Love and tolerance will beat fear and intolerance every time.

The human race is fundamentally good, we should not lose sight of this because of a few nutjobs.

Originally Posted by spouse of scouse

Just musing here. If a law/decree whatever was passed that no one who died while committing an act of terrorism would receive a funeral in accordance with their faith, do you think that would act as a deterrent?

Originally Posted by GarryP

.

If there were an easy, simple, workable way of dealing with it, it would have been put in place by now.

Originally Posted by Amazulu

Mozza's a great Briton but he usually does talk a pile of shite. Not so this time:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...orism-response

Onya Mozza - you've hit the nail on the head

Originally Posted by aries

A pity he didn't mention that Jeremy Corbyn was associated with IRA killers for much of his life, and still refuses to label them as terrorists.

Originally Posted by spouse of scouse

Although it should be unnecessary to say it - yes, I do realize that.