<p>[1</a> Man Dead & 2 Injured During London Street Machete Attack (PHOTOS) | Global Grind](<a href=“http://globalgrind.com/news/1-dead-2-injured-london-woolwich-machete-street-attack-photos]1”>1 Man Dead & 2 Injured During London Street Machete Attack (PHOTOS))</p>
<p>Fortunately, the Muslim Council of Britain condemned the attack on the victim.</p>
<p>There is speculation that it is a terrorist attack (seemingly because the dead man was a serving soldier, who was wearing a Help for Heroes t-shirt - Help for Heroes is a charity that helps injured servicement and women). However, this has not been confirmed, and it has certainly not been confirmed that it was an attack by Islamists AFAIK. </p>
<p>The video from ITV does not show the full speech by the man in question (I don’t know if it was all filmed), but what he does say is “We apologise that women had to see this today, but in our lands women have to see the same. You people will never be safe. Remove your government. They don’t care about you”. It should probably be noted that he speaks with a strong London accent - he’s clearly not travelled from elsewhere to commit this act - and there is no mention of Islam or Allah, at least in the videos that I have seen.
[Exclusive</a> video: Man with bloodied hands speaks at Woolwich scene - ITV News](<a href=“http://www.itv.com/news/update/2013-05-22/exclusive-video-man-with-bloodied-hands-speaks-at-woolwich-scene/]Exclusive”>http://www.itv.com/news/update/2013-05-22/exclusive-video-man-with-bloodied-hands-speaks-at-woolwich-scene/)</p>
<p>I, however, would like to know why they felt safe enough to stand so close and film the man - if it was me then I would want to be getting away as fast as possible - I can only presume that the police will be asking the same question. </p>
<p>It’s an isolated incident. I live in a neighbourhood with a very high proportion of Muslims, about two hours away by train from London. Will it change what I do every day? Certainly not.</p>
<p>Terrorism or not - It’s time to outlaw any religious sect that believes itself to be perfect and only tolerates the concept of change with violence. All religions!</p>
<p>BTW-God can be perfect, but since religion is recorded, translated and administered by men, it never can be.</p>
<p>One really tires of the radical violent religious groups in this world.</p>
<p>Post #3:</p>
<p>An Isolated incident??? Are you kidding?</p>
<p>No. I’m not kidding. These things are relatively rare, and in a country which a Muslim population of ~5% (over 3m in total) if it was anything but an isolated incident, then we would be having acts like this committed every other day. I live a stone’s throw away from an army base, in a largely Muslim neighbourhood (though I am, myself, a white atheist), and I’ve never seen anything occur there. I’ve seen protests outside the Pakistani embassy, but never outside the army base. </p>
<p>When a white person, a Christian, an atheist etc. commits an act of violence, no one sits there and generalises their behaviour to the rest of that demographic. Why do people think that it’s appropriate when it’s a Muslim?</p>
<p>I’ve just looked it up on wikipedia, and according to that, since 2000 the only Islamic terror incidents in the UK have been
- 7/7 bombings (2005)
- When someone drove a burning car into Glasgow airport (2007), an act which killed only one perpetrator and no one else
- A rather minor bombing (in so far as a bombing ever is minor, though I don’t actually remember it) in Exeter, which injured only the perpetrator (2008)
- Today’s machete attack</p>
<p>It’s hardly a problem that is out of control, and nor is it that a significant proportion of Muslims are involved. Britain has been attacked far more times by the IRA, but I don’t hear anyone going and saying that all Irish people are terrorists.</p>
<p>I concur ^</p>
<p>I am not going comment any further, but this is hardly an isolated incident. And I’m not referring to terrorist incidents in England.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Because the terrorist say they are acting in the name of their god and other muslims. Islamic terrorism is hardly a UK problem. It is world wide, growing, and based on a religion of hate and intolerance. </p>
<p>I don’t remember the Irish Republican Army claiming they were killing in the name of Christ or a Christian God. They were acting because they did not want to be ruled by people they didn’t like.</p>
<p>What I don’t get and will never understand is why so many people refuse to take the word of the perpetrators of attacks when they state clearly and for attribution the reasons why they commit these acts. It is onionesque to see the reflexive “the motive had not been determined” schtick after an attack in which the attacker shouted Allahu Akbar or left a note or otherwise said in plain language why they did what they did.</p>
<p>I would go with “Islamist” rather than “Muslim”. One is a religious faith, the other is a political position. The political position is motivated by the faith, but the faith is independent of the political position.</p>
<p>I’m a liberal, pro-choice Christian. If someone bombs an abortion clinic in the name of God, what should I do? Renounce my faith? I’m not going to be in denial about the fact that many or most or all such acts are committed by right-wing Christians, nor about the fact that religion affects worldview and worldview affects politics, but I would be pained if someone made assumptions about my politics, my personal beliefs and the threat level implied by my presence based on my faith.</p>
<p>my heart goes out to the victim :(</p>
<p>
Crusuades for the sake of Christianity
Bombing abortion clinics
Just a few out of many</p>
<p>
if it is inherently a religion of hatred and intolerance, then why are the majority of it’s followered tolerant, perfectly fine people?</p>
<p>It’s pathetic that so many continue to stick their heads in the sand and just can’t understand that we are at war with an enemy that want to see Americans dead simply because they can’t tolerate our way of life…and it starts from the top</p>
<p>^And because we are trying to impose OUR way of life on others. Let’s get out of the Middle East and see what happens.</p>
<p>
The enemy are radical, sick terrorists who want to oppress others and are willing to kill, because they disagree with the American way of life, you are correct.</p>
<p>However, the enemy does not include all Muslims and shouldn’t be labeled “Islam,” because there are many followers of Islam (the vast majority, in fact) who are peaceful.</p>
<p>who said all Muslims are the enemy?..no one. Why can’t so many utter the words Islamist terrorists?..</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And when where the Crusades? Part of the problem with the nutty muslims is that they they think the Crusades occurred yesterday and they have to avenge the death of muslims. </p>
<p>There is a difference between bombing a building and killing people. How many abortion doctors have been killed in the name of Christianity verses how many people have been killed in the name of the muslim god? </p>
<p>I have read that somewhere between five and fifteen percent of muslims are radicalized. There are over a billion muslims. Given those percentages, it should be obvious there is a real problem with that religion. Even the peaceful one’s don’t seem to care much for jews.</p>
<p>
When they were is besides the point… And what does this have to do with what the terrorists believe about the Crusuades? The Crusuades are no justification for killing innocents, but they did happen and help show that there are fanatics in every group.</p>
<p>
The number of victims is irrelevant… The point is there are radical people with radical intentions among every religious group. It’s about intention, not how close they got to their goal. If abortion bombers had the oppurtunity to simultaneously bomb every abortion clinic in the US, they would. They’re perfectly willing to kill millions in order to stop abortions.</p>
<p>
Firstly, it would be appreciated if you state a source. Secondly, the term “radicalized” is a very subjective term. It could mean many things.
Either way, the percentages you give still show that it’s a minorty. But regardless, the fact that peaceful Muslims exist shows that there is a peaceful way to practice the religion, hence showing that the religion is not inherently violent.
And again, citation needed for your comment about antisemitism.</p>