Its taken 10 years but Blair finally sorts himself out!

[TAP]

there's no evidence as far as i know to suggest it was done by radical terrorists claiming to be muslims.

There's videotape evidence that the bombers were not only muslim but they did it because of Islam.

That doesn't mean that they did it because of Islam, I can go out and shoot 3 people dead tonight then say I heard voices in my head, that doesn't mean that I did.

That's a really, really poor attempt at an analogy, try again.....

[25]

there's no evidence as far as i know to suggest it was done by radical terrorists claiming to be muslims.

There's videotape evidence that the bombers were not only muslim but they did it because of Islam.

That doesn't mean that they did it because of Islam, I can go out and shoot 3 people dead tonight then say I heard voices in my head, that doesn't mean that I did.

That's a really, really poor attempt at an analogy, try again.....

I think he's trying to say that the "justification" for a crime is an excuse to commit the crime rather than the reason for committing the crime. 

Like when someone commits mass murder "inspired by" a movie or a band. Millions of other people may have seen the same movie and killed no-one, so should the murder be blamed on the movie or the murderer? Ergo,  is Islam to blame for muslim terrorists or is organized terrorism to blame? I'm sure there have been terrorists of all creeds, do we blame their religion or the terrorists themselves? 

I don't think that the poster "Sakib" has a valid point in questioning whether the terrorists were "real" muslims. They could have been the most devout muslims in the world, it didn't affect the fact that they most definately were terrorists. And that's how I choose to view them, by their actions not their faith.

[TAP]

there's no evidence as far as i know to suggest it was done by radical terrorists claiming to be muslims.

There's videotape evidence that the bombers were not only muslim but they did it because of Islam.

That doesn't mean that they did it because of Islam, I can go out and shoot 3 people dead tonight then say I heard voices in my head, that doesn't mean that I did.

That's a really, really poor attempt at an analogy, try again.....

I think he's trying to say that the "justification" for a crime is an excuse to commit the crime rather than the reason for committing the crime. 

I know he's trying to say that, and I think it's a bad analogy. An excuse (such as voices in your head) is shifting the blame, the 7/7 bombers weren't shifting the blame to Islam they were embracing it as part of their religious belief. I already said that I don't think Islam is to blame for 7/7 or terrorism in general, but if you are forming communities within nations based on a shared religion, and members of your community commit atrocities in the name of that religion, the perhaps you need to direct some of your questioning inwards rather than shifting the blame outwards.........if you want to be integrated into that society. I realize that this is probably hopeless, religions (all of them) are great at pointing out how someone isn't a "true" believer and thus absolving themselves of all responsibility.

[Sakib]

25 if they were devout they would realise terrorism is completely wrong. its like being a hindu and muslim at once. very impossible

[TAP]

25 if they were devout they would realise terrorism is completely wrong.

o dear you are lacking in true scotsmen.

[Surfrider]

you can't justify bad behavior by pointing to bad behavior.

Oh my gawd man!

That is all you guys ever do!

hahahahahahahaha

Wow you are a hypocrite!

Show me one place where I have done that.? Please.? Your silence will prove my point.

You guys have done that during any talk of the Iraq war........take your pick!

Nice vague response.? Quit linking me in with "you guys."? I have done no such thing, and I challenge you to find an example to support your accusation.

I will take your non-response as a concession.

[SLCPUNK]

You did plenty under your other name: GNRnightrain.

[Izzy]

25 if they were devout they would realise terrorism is completely wrong. its like being a hindu and muslim at once. very impossible

sadly there are enough passages in the Qu'ran (and the Bible too) to enable you to be devout and a terrorist.

Thats the consequence of texts written in a different age

At times we must look past the actually words and see the meaning behind them - it might say to spread faith by the sword, but isnt the real message to be passionate and resourceful in your preaching?

I dont think God wanted anyone to die....and where it says other wise, perhaps its best to write that off as a typo, God's message may be perfect but i doubt the scribe was

[Sakib]

25 if they were devout they would realise terrorism is completely wrong. its like being a hindu and muslim at once. very impossible

sadly there are enough passages in the Qu'ran (and the Bible too) to enable you to be devout and a terrorist.

Thats the consequence of texts written in a different age

At times we must look past the actually words and see the meaning behind them - it might say to spread faith by the sword, but isnt the real message to be passionate and resourceful in your preaching?

I dont think God wanted anyone to die....and where it says other wise, perhaps its best to write that off as a typo, God's message may be perfect but i doubt the scribe was

where? Where does it say in both books to kill innocents? The error lies not with the works but in the translation. Grammar is a trick which will never be translated by man. trust me i know the trick partly. If i say "Your mum" to someone in solihull where i live, they'll know its offensive for "your mums a slag." In urdu you try and say the same thing and it wont have the same ring whatsoever.

[Surfrider]

You did plenty under your other name: GNRnightrain.

You are back at that one, eh?  You are a funny guy SLC.  Nice cop-out.