Sunday, 24 July 2011

Why not radical Christian terrorist?

I cannot say with any degree of confidence that i completely understand the right wing/left wing thing. What i do understand is that extremes from both sides have been responsible for far too much killing. For Hitler on the right side, there is Stalin on the left so people to nod knowingly once Anders Behring Breivik's right wing religious credentials were known as if to go some way towards explaining his reasons behind his atrocity is a bit rich.
If his actions can be put down to religious dogma and political extremism then he is in the same camp as Al Quaida which puts the right wing extremists such as the EDL who have been most vocal against Muslim extremism in a predicament now that one of their own has done exactly what Al Quaida might have chosen to do, to exactly the same people. There are strong parallels to the Al Quaidi murder spree in Mumbai.
After 9/11 and 7/7, the Muslims came under fire for not speaking out against jihadist, so will the the Christians and far right groups be called upon to examine itself, its core doctrines and beliefs and do more to combat terrorism and extremism from within its ranks?
The media's first port of call to blame for Fridays massacre was Radical Islamic Terrorists but i have yet to hear Behring Brevik be called a Radical Christian Terrorist, the labels most used are lone gunman, murderer and killer.
The implication being that his Christian beliefs could absolutely not have anything to do with his actions.
Terrorism is the same even if the killers are far right religious conservatives, Al-Qaida, Basque Separatives, the IRA or Timothy McVeigh.
So, if he killed because he was driven by extreme Christian and political dogma, then he is a Radical Christian Terrorist and should be named as so however uncomfortable that makes the right wing and Christians feel that one of theirs was capable of such an atrocious act.


Anonymous said...

Yes, the media ignores Christian (and Jewish and Hindu terrorism). Whether it be the Iraq War, the killings in Rwanda, genocide in Bosnia, or everyday attacks on innocent Muslim immigrants everyday, it is the work of Christian terrorists. Time to call them out!!!

Falling on a bruise said...

Or we could just not slap the religious label on them in the first place.

Cheezy said...

"Or we could just not slap the religious label on them in the first place."

Even when they state, plainly and unequivocally, that they're killing for religious reasons? If this species is going to evolve then sane people need to shine a light on insanity.

"With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion."
(Steven Weinberg)

And I'm not worried in the slightest about people who happen to share the same religion as a madman taking offence at this 'labelling'. I look at it this way: I happen to be an atheist. If some guy goes into a church and kills 20 people, letting it be known that he has done so because he's an atheist and doesn't like Christians, then I think this should be reported. I won't take offence. It's not me who's committed this mad/evil act, it's someone else. The fact that we may agree about one thing doesn't implicate me in his crime. Generally speaking, I think peoples' motivations should always be examined after they've done something like this. Sensible people won't attribute the blame the blame to the wrong people.

Of course, in saying this, I do realise that a great deal of 'Islamophobia' was generated after 9-11 (especially on blogs and bullshit right-wing talking shops on TV), with much hatred expressed for entirely innocent parties who happened to be Muslim too, however you can't legislate for idiots being idiots. It doesn't mean we shouldn't know about people's motivations; that's just 'head in the sand' stuff.

Falling on a bruise said...

From the reports i have heard and read, he did it out of some deluded political ideology, not a religious ideology so he did not kill because he was a Christian. As i understand Bin Laden and his gang, they also killed out of some political ideology (namely the USA dumping him after the Soviets pulled out of Afghanistan) which then morphed into a religious war to keep the pot bubbling. Always easier to appeal to someones religion in a relgious area rather than their political standpoint.
If the Norwegian says he did it because he was a Christian then fair enough, if Bin Laden did what he did and said it was because he was a Musilm, then fair enough, one's a Christian terrorist and the other is an Islamic terrorist but the same rule has to apply to both.

Anonymous said...

seems to me he pretty much labled himself...


Cheezy said...

Fair enough Hanz, I thought you were saying that we shouldn't even enquire into these peoples' motivations; my mistake. And I totally agree that we shouldn't apply double-standards when dealing with different creeds/religions etc.