I have a theory on what drives them to do this for anyone who is bothered to read my theory! Not at all a justification, but what might possess them to do their nonsense....and only refers to homegrown ones...

Firstly, almost all Muslims feel angry with what goes on in the Middle East. Sometimes non-Muslims find it hard to understand, but the same way most people feel an attachment to their fellow countrymen, Muslims feel even stronger to their fellow Muslims, as this is a strong part of the faith (even if not carried out with the consistency it should have). So when Iraq is attacked, or certain countries happily stand by and watch Lebanon / Palestine get destroyed for things they themselves really don't have enough power/money/infrastructure to control, it creates anger. Fair enough, people have the right to go after whoever bombs their land, but within reason and proportion obviously, which is not what is seen.

Also, for some reason, it seems a 100,000 Iraqi lives won't get the attention a handful of western lives would, not just in Britain, but anywhere in the world bar that region. And it is justified as a part of the war on terror - even though this terror killed a fraction of that amount. The double standards, again create anger.

Equally, there exists a feeling of resentment toward their own leaders, as a lot of the Middle Eastern rulers are corrupt or, like Blair, will go out of their way to please America, regardless of what their people want or what's right. Overall it is just anger and frustration building up, that I'd imagine the average Muslim feels at least a little, on occassion.

For most people, this anger is kept inside, or voiced in protests, and that's it. Muslims & non-Muslims alike, protests are the most we do. So that's the anger side of things.

Now the mindset....it is my opinion that most of the homegrown terrorists (or wannabe terrorists), have at some point of their lives, neglected their religion. Those who follow it, or gradually increase their practice of it, feel content and at peace (like any religion I guess) - slowly building up their knowledge, and having the common sense to know when someone is trying to influence them with rubbish.

At the other end of that, is those who don't practice it, but still hold the fundamental beliefs of Islam, and thus still feel anger. They are literally at the other end of the stick, they do not feel content, they do not seek to increase their knowledge, etc. So one day, something happens in their life, they suddenly feel the guilt of neglecting what they believe they should have been doing all along.

They then panic almost, as if they have wasted a big part of their lives, and look to make amends. Now some, in fact the majority, will go on to be fine, normal people, practising their religion like any other. But in the rush to make amends and seek knowledge on how to do so, they are easily influenced, and easily misguided....they, meaning just a handful of this group of people, the ones with lesser logic.

All it takes is some nut-case calling himself a Sheikh, they will look upto to him, and he can get into their heads and exploit their anger, brainwashing them quite easily.

The Qur'an is written in an ancient text, and to trully understand it, or comment on it, one would have to study the language, IMO. We can all read the translation, but it's just not the same. If one studies the language, they can see how some people can easily misinterpret things in a way they choose, and then use it to preach to those who don't understand it and therefore can't dispute it, as they already lack knowledge, and if common sense is missing too, can easily fall for such nonsense.

Thus, a small group of people, generally consisting of previously so-called corrupt Muslims, and perhaps people new to the faith, through anger and lack of knowledge nor common sense, are easily led to extremist concepts. This is a generalisation of course.

Examples of homegrown terrorists:
Abu Hamza (hardly practised again, I remember reading about his getting a woman pregnant and then marrying her before disappearing with her son to Egypt - not certain on this, but none of this is too Islamic)

Richard Reid (shoebomber, convert, new to the faith)

The protester who dressed as a bomber (was non-practicing, drug-dealer)

7/7 bomber (the only one i've read much about, drank loads of alcohol, and didn't follow his religion)

Abu Izzadeen (criminal record, served time in prison to my knowledge)

The Brit guys arrested and sent to Guantanamo Bay (used their court hearing dates in England to prove they were not training with Al Qaeda at the time, thus involved in some criminal activity obviously)

etc.

In conclusion I dunno if I made any real point, just my theory on who and why people can be influenced, that of course doesn't apply to all...Islam, like a lot religions, is powerful in how it dictates your conscience. It can give you a feeling of total peace if followed properly. And guilt if not. I guess that's an effect of all religions..

Hope no offense has been course in this essay, nor too much boredom or pointlessness...but it is just total nonsense when Bush & Blair say these people wanna get rid of freedom and values, it has absolutely nothing to do with that - it's all about anger and frustration, and double standards, all combined with guilt and stupidity - a mix very very easy to brainwash, and thus easy to remove any attachment they might have with the country they grew up in.

Pointless post over, at least it kept me busy!

A well put theory. My own for what it's worth is more basic. Rotten apples whatever race, religion, creed use emotional subjects as a vehicle to destroy and get a perverse sense of worth and belonging that they cannot get like you and I. They may as JA9 says above use the above subject for this, they may also use Animal protests, Hunt protests and dare I say football. What I agree with JA9 with is regardless of what vehicle they choose they generally have no real knowledge or any real interest in the subject, they hook up to it and try and fasttrack their involvement, they need to accepted by their adopted subject and think that becoming fundamentalist in 'this new family' means they'll be accepted and respected by the heirachy.

My two pence worth:

I heard a very interesting interview with a guy (I think he wrote for a Christian newspaper) who was kidnapped in Iraw last year but released a few days later. His theory (and one that I am inclined to give more credit to than many others I've heard) runs along the lines that many young British Muslim men fully embrace the British culture. They are born here, brought up here, are "assimilated" into British society, attend school and University, drink and smoke etc and don't follow their parents' religion at all.

BUT - the problem is that they fail. For whatever reason, they don't pass exams, or they find it impossibe to get a decent job, they can't attract a "western" woman, they just can't drink as much as everyone around them seems to be drinking etc. This is frustrating for them (and as much a fault of our systems sometimes as their own ineptitude) - they have immersed themselves in British culture, sometimes despite the warnings of their parents/friends etc about what will happen to them, and have been rewarded with zip. They have a dead end job and live in a nasty neighbourhood - all their dreams of living the "western" lifestyle and escaping from the poverty/conflict their parents or grandparents suffered in their home countries are dashed by a life that seems just as bad.

So - they grow angry. They turn back to their own culture and religion. And the anger that they feel is perfect for those who want to brainwash new terrorists because it can be tapped into, causing them to turn on the society that they feel owes them a life in the most extreme way possible. And don't forget, martyrdom might seem like the most attractive possibility they have going for them.

I am not trying to (and would never) justify extremism, nor do I wish to generalise. I think though that this is a fairly rational argument that could be part of the reason behind why some of those people who become "footsoldiers" do so.

Any muslim that does drink, i have no time for. Hope they rot. In fact i wouldnt even call them muslims.

Im born and bred in England. I havent done particularly well in my studies and its tough for me to get a job but theres no way in hell il do what these prats are doing. Killing innocent people in the name of Islam. Thats just.......well i cant explain it but it makes me so angry.

They have brought disgrace to the name of Islam which is a peaceful religion.

Whilst I agree with you to an extent Perry, I don't think that is so much the case for homegrown British terrorists, though the ones who fail in such a way would be easy targets for recruitment I guess.

But to my knowledge the 7/7 bombers did not fall into that category, and apparently most of the suspects in this current thing are middle-class citizens...it is directly related to foreign policy, the anger that is exploited, IMO.

I watched newsnight, and the host asked some MP to comment on whether Britain was a target before it went into Iraq, and he side-stepped, speaking of America's 9/11. She then asked again, asking specifically about Britain, and he side-stepped again, repeating his previous answer....it was such a blatant attempt to avoid answering the question, it really looked pathetic.

So yeah, my point is the anger that is exploited, is in my opinion a lot more to do with feeling helpless in watching their brothers and sisters (as a Muslim sees his fellow Muslim) being attacked, and seeing their own nation in Britain take part in it. They are British, yes, but if one has two siblings, and they see one bullying the other, they aren't gonna just sit on the fence, they will sympathise with the one being bullied.

IMO this concept of feeling attached to a people of a completely different nation or continent even, really seems to be a difficult one for the Western world to grasp for some reason, so much so they deny such a bond exists (i.e, Blair), and completely overlook the anger and frustration being created.

Of course, it should be the case that all people feel such a bond to each other, regardless of race, religion, or nationality, but that is far far away from reality. To value the life of one over another is a seriously sad state of society.

islam itself is a young religion. remember the crusades where christians went around killing everyone? at that point in christian history, it was a young religion. islam is at that point right now where it's still not as mature as other religions around it (an example being the Muhammad cartoons that caused an uproar in the middle east).

It's only about 500 years younger than Christianity.

And there are between 1.3 - 1.6 billion Muslims in the world, of which I really can't see more than a million being terrorists...of course they are the ones who make the headlines, it only takes 20, maybe supported by another 30, to create havoc.

But it doesn't compare in the slightest way with the Crusades, the proportion of people doing this crap so tiny, and does not have the support of the well over 1.25 billion Muslims at the very least...

It is definitely a sensitive religion though, not ready to accept humour at the expense of it's key figures, but once again it was a few hundred people over the world who went mad and did crazy things. And part of being a Muslim is to love and follow Prophet Muhammad - pbuh - and seeing him be insulted is not dissimilar to seeing ones own parents being insulted.

But I don't think that will change with time.

British foreign policy is the biggest reason

500 years can mean a lot

Muslims can't paint pictures of the Prophet now just like christians couldn't depict Jesus Christ years ago. But all it took was one person to do it and now we've seen Jesus as everything.

what happened when the prophet was drawn a few months ago? I predict someone will finally step up and draw him in at the most a century.

My point was that it doesn't compare to the crusades one bit.

Whether they will overcome certain insentivities or not though, we will see in the future. People have already been depicting him in the middle east in certain areas, as was shown on newsnight or panaroma or one of the bbc programs at that time...it's the nature of the ones drawn which I can assure you will never be considered to be acceptable for as long as people take their faith as seriously as they do.

And people are taking it more and more seriously, over the past decade. Which comes back to my initial post on the non-practising others being left behind and then trying to almost catch-up in desperate and misguided ways.

On this letter sent to government, it's really worrying...they warn that it is foreign policy that is to blame, and the government denies this obviously. And it almost comes off as blackmail, even though they are just expressing their views on what creates this crap.

But what is worrying is the general public's stance - the vast majority were against Blair's foreign policies, they themselves saying things were not right, and they themselves saying it'll just create more terrorists.

Now I read various forums (bbc, yahoo) and I mainly see, "if the Muslims aren't happy with our foreign policy, they should get out. Why should we change our ways for them?"

What a load of bollocks, as if the majority themselves supported Blair's foreign policies....it's almost as if ignorance is taking over, driven by anger and frustration. What I always loved about the UK is that people are usually above that, and think clearly and have fair opinions - whether I agreed with them or not, there was always a logical and rational thought process behind them. But it's worrying that that may be changing thanks to the terrorists.

Nobody's asking Britain to let terrorists dictate their foreign policy, but to let what is right and wrong (using non-false intelligence) do so instead. How can they honestly believe people seeing bombs being dropped on a country, with 100,000 civlians dying in 'collateral damage' (i.e., "terror on an unprecedented scale" multiplied by 25), and achieving absolutely nothing, does not create anger and does not have at least some triggering effect for the tiny minority, who seek revenge in horrible ways?

Nobody is justifying it, but to say it doesn't play a part is sheer ignorance.

its one thing to say you find a drawing of the prophet offensivem or taht 'the satanic versus' insults your religion, or even that madonna appearing in a video in black robes and morphing into a flock of black hawks offends your sensibilities. (apparently some regard that imagery as satanic)

...but to then demand that people in a secular, non muslim environment censor (or behead :blink: ) such artists is frankly, ridiculous. Theres suposed to be some edict about representing the human form though I dont see taht being strictly applied to news media in the isalmic worlld who publish derogatory and racist cartoon about, say 'hook nosed' jews or jesus christ.

pure sharia muslim states give pretty much fuck all freedom to non muslims to express themselves. I know that limited tolerance for judaism and christianity is written into the koran, but in general its zero tolerance if muslim law is in force.

So I find it sickening if those elements cry foul and attempt to force their views on others outside of a sharia jurisdiction. total double standard

Hey Cripps, I know your feelings on not drinking and I respect your views, but I have been to various muslim countrys and it seemes even practicing muslims drink. Not so much in the Middle East and North Africa,but in Asia it seemes a BIT more relaxed.
Its like anything you take out of it what you want...Im sure most Christians don't go to Church every Sunday..and most Buddhists don't starve themselves etc.

Just a thought.

IMO you won't find a Muslim who drinks, even calling himself a real practising Muslim, even if they do practice certain elements...though I personally wouldn't say they're non-Muslims...just hypocrites in a way....

A bit like a some calling themselves an environmentalist, taking care to recycle, and then driving around central London in a Hummer....

i have loads of muslim mates and NONE of them stick to all the rules of Islam,some drink but dont eat pig,others eat pig but dont drink,and yet they all criticise each other for breaking one rule or another?

im not a religious person,but i do respect others beliefs,it just seems strange that they can call each other 'not real muslim' when they are breaking rules themselves??

i'm a muslim and i don't drink alcohal, eat haram things etc etc etc

yet i do know some young muslim boys that do the opposite of this, its a shame as then they go to Friday prayers and claim to be religious when they are not.

Thanks AA and K.T, Thats my point..

I beleve you K.T, you can't even spell ALCOHOL :haha: get it together man.. :D


"Robinho"

Yeah it's all hyprocracy, unfortunately!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ih7XYbC3Ec
some intresting words by George Galloway

I would never read of listen to anything that man says he's a total asshole and is no better than the hate filled preachers :angry: .

I'm not a fan of the man, and he is quite biased, but he made a bloody good point in that last 45 seconds that cannot possibly be labelled as bias, that's for sure!

Feel sorry for the Sky presenter who had to interview him though, what a tough guest to have on the show, she did well to keep calm!

I think he's a tosser, but I had to respect him when he defended himself in the States against the political big boys. Great performance (but thats what it was..a performance)

:lol:

coming from the man that spelt Robinho.."Ribena" :D ..not :rolleyes:

:lol: not quite K.T,

I think I had a Robinhio Robiniho, but not a Ribena :lol:

Some suspects, including Mr Sarwar, 25, joined Tablighi Jamaat, an international missionary sect encouraging followers to live like the Prophet, growing beards and praying five times a day. Volunteers are sent around Britain from mosque to mosque, bringing only a sleeping bag and provisions.

By day they tour Muslim communities, knocking on doors to discuss faith with the men of the house and inviting them to evening gatherings. The movement condemns terrorism but French Intelligence describes it as the “antechamber of fundamentalism”.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2319582,00.html


ANd:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/terrorism/story/0,,1853800,00.html

Both articles, speaking about that group, make it sound so suspicious, but what a load of bollocks. I know these guys, enough of them, all they do is encourage people to pray and not do wrong. They travel to poor areas and do the same....bloody press are making it sound like they travel for dodgy reasons, I know for a fact this is nonsense....

Quite worrying...I don't deny there must be plenty of recruitment groups for the terrorists, but this is just picking random religious groups and making a story out of it....unbelievable to be honest, I'd expect this in the states, but not here.

And yeah, 7 suspects came from there, but this group is in it's millions easily, probably over 10million, one of the biggest in the world, and 7 out of a few million, makes them all terrorists apparently? Or atleast suspicious, just coz they travel....oh dear...