Is it helpful to dismiss religious fundamentalism as incidental to acts of terror and dismiss all actions as the acts of crazy people? I recognize that helping people avoid judging the acts of large groups based upon the act of a few is admirable but to ignore fundamentalism seems perilous.
Not real sure of my position here and I can be convinced that it is wrong.

I think you are correct. We've gone too far the other way.

These weren't just two crazy people who happened to be religious. These two people are crazy purely because they had been radicalised by fundamentalist Islamist extremists. Religion (or indeed these guys interpretation or perception of what their religion is) is an important part of the discussion.

99% of British Muslims are brown(ish)/black. The far-right use the terms Muslim, Asian and P*ki pretty interchangeably.

Well why on earth not cut someones head off in the middle of the street if that's what you feel like doing today? Why not? It not like they're going to be punished or anything is it?

No. They get 5 meals a day with a TV and gym, a much better life than what 80%+ of the worlds populations have. Oh and it costs the tax payer around £40k per year, per prisoner in the UK. This is why I don't take life seriously anymore, if I did I would go ****ing insane and start cutting peoples heads off and ****.

Keep on spending your precise time debating guys, guess what in the morning nothing has changed. The world is utterly ****ed.

UK must have some fat prisoners with 5 meals a day.

Reminds me of GTA when people just casually walk by right after you've killed 20 people.

This x 100

Overall white working class England is still pretty racist at all times outside of cities. I work all over the country doing manual stuff and as a white guy with thick cockney accent I hear it all.
The weirdest thing is when you mention "what about so-and-so he's Muslim ain't he?" it's always the same response - "Ah yeah well he's alright ain't he but.....". Everyone individually is fine, but put them in a mosque up North and they're a group of secret baby eaters. Weird.

Love this. The 'you're alright but it's the rest of them'. Rio Ferdinand spoke about this once, it seems to be a universal experience for ethnic minorities/muslims/immigrants in certain non-urban places. I wish people would realise that 98% of the group they're raving about are in the 'alright but' category.

There's a problem with this?

It's fair to bring up the influence of religion in the thoughts and actions of people. It is also fair to strenuously condemn specific acts and teachings of individual fundamentalists. If a particular muslim cleric preaches the downfall of western civilisation for example, but we are condemning the statement not the characteristics of the person issuing it. It is more powerful and far clearer to say "anyone who wishes death on innocents is evil" rather than "muslim fundamentalists are evil because they wish death on innocents."

The first statement is a certainty (obviously all morals are relative blah blah) the second isn't true. There are certainly some muslim fundamentalists that don't wish death on innocents so the second statement is bigoted. The first statement condemns all the individual people you wish to condemn while leaving out all those who may share characteristics but not beliefs and actions.

I think the suspects painted a pretty clear picture of what motivated them. Muslim apologists aren't ever going to listen to them.

Do you think these 2 guys speak for every Muslim?

Yeah, normally they wait for a football match, but a beheading will work, too.

You want to deport Brits from Britain?

So, how many Muslims have lived peaceful lives in Britain without ever murdering anyone?

Only if you respect the Constitution.

Two people (not the attackers who were shot yesterday) arrested on suspicion of conspiracy to murder.

The quote I was quoting said he was guilty of the crime....

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/...ate=2011-04-06

almost one in four British Muslims believe that last year's 7/7 attacks on London were justified because of British support for the U.S.-led war on terror.

The scary reality is that only three percent of British Muslims "took a consistently pro-freedom of speech line on these questions."

Thirty percent of British Muslims would prefer to live under Sharia (Islamic religious) law than under British law.

Close to 1/4 admitted to a pollster that they support a terrorist attack. They are quite happy to to tell people about their radical beliefs. Muslim apologists just won't listen.

Correct. Even when convicted of a crime, you still have rights under the Constitution.

but bigots gonna bigot yo

http://www.gallup.com/poll/148763/mu...-violence.aspx

damn you, rjoe!

Lol polls aside no one has a problem condemning individuals who advocate harming innocents.

It's worth multiquoting 1000 times.