Out of Pod Experience

There is no need for extra BS charges based on 'terrorism'. WTF is terrorism anyway. If They guys did this because the soldier had screwed one of the guys wives. What would the people be chanting.... definitely not TERRORISM ahhhhhh. They would be calling them murderers. They would be tried, found guilty, and probably executed of murder. Nothing more is needed in this case or any case like this.

The motive should have nothing to do with the type of charge. Motives are pertinent to trial law but should not have any bearing on charges. Charge them with murder, try them, let them present whatever defense they like, let the jury judge and sentence them, and then fulfill the sentence. No extra bureaucratic red tape is needed.

The term terrorism is used to instantly galvanize the people's opinion based purely on some subjective thoughts based on the motive of the crime. It is the medias way of swaying opinion; which is rarely needed. The media should just present the news and leave the rest to the system.



The way we deal with it is that, when crimes are committed in our society we punish the individuals as they should be punished under our law. We should quell our attempts at subjugating the Islamic Law nations that do not want to operate under Common or Civil Law. And when I say quell our attempts, I mean complete and total pull out of all governmental and public ventures. Including all corporations operating energy allocation operations. Then let the people of those nations decide how they want to be led.

/end of very unpopular belief

Then those, numerous and large majority of Muslims, that want to be in the 'West', will come to the West. Then and only then can the wounds of the colonization attempts of the Islamic nations begin to heal and morph their society. If we remember history, the part of the world dominated by Islam, was a 'fairly' civil society, In Its Time. Once the West entered into the equation, the culture clash started, and when this occurs, fundamentalists are bred. We can be hopeful that the taste of technology and knowledge will continue to infiltrate the Muslim nations. That being said, we have Christian extremists as well, so the thought that violent acts, no matter the motivation, can be totally prevented, is preposterous.

I have only heard a few times, and only recently, the media calling men like this terrorists. The term is not needed, it has not been needed, and should never be used to effect the judicial process.

The same occurred with the recent bombing of the Boston Marathon. The perpetrator's Uncle came out and called them a disgrace to the Kazak ethnicity. On an aside, I also commend the man for using the term ethnicity.

This is why I detest the usage of the term terrorism. It is typically solely used to galvanize public opinion against, not just the perpetrators, but Islam in totality.

Oops, double post. sorry my bad

The fact of the matter is that if we do not look at history and understand the motivation of the Fundamentalist end of the Islamic philosophy we will not solve the problem. The fact of the matter is that the West has ****** up the relations with the Islamic Nations for centuries.

The man with the knife said, "pull your governments out". He meant pull the Western influence out of Islamic countries. That is what they want. If we isolate them like they want some of the countries will revert and others will progress. But we need to pull out all governmental and non governmental agencies, out of all countries that operate under Islamic Law. Let these countries decide their futures without external influence. But too many people are interested in maintaining the Energy industry's grasp on the region and until that grasp is released this type of stuff will continue whether we like it or not. Violence begets violence. One does not need to be liberal to understand this concept

Wrong, that is how martyrs are made.

This no real need for debate on this line as it does not really matter . I believe this to be true as enough Muslim men commit acts of violence in the name of Allah so as it actually has little influence on the greater Fundamentalist movement because there is no real cohesion between the groups. This parallels the reasons why the Neo ****/ racist movements in the US never get past the regional level, as there is no one single individual with enough charisma to bring all the varying groups together.

Religion of peace!

That´s a different aspect upon which I partly agree. I was mostly talking about the "executed" part.

I think the UK has always had the right approach when dealing with these attacks, mourn and honour the dead and then let the attack and the loons who did it fade into history.

Do everything you can to try to prevent it ever happening again (watching out for the thin line between protection and going nuts) but don't let it change the way you live your life.

This isn't an Islam thing, its simply an over religious loony, sadly most religions have or had them.

Systematicaly illegal. It would be easier to remove the right to own a gun in America today than to repeal the ban on the death penalty in the European Union. We've been trying to deport a chap called Abu Qatata for years, but to no avail because we have defined the EU as so above the rest of the world morally that we cannot deport scum like him to Jordan because they could use the death penalty.