Van Hits Pedestrians near Finsbury Park Mosque

[sk688]

Thoughts go out to all involved after this shocking incident , where a white man , is believed to have driven a man into a crowd of Muslims , who were there for evening prayers

1 dead and 8 injured

Incident being treated as a potential terrorist attack

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-40322960

A man has died and 10 people have been injured after a man drove a van into worshippers near a north London mosque.

The van struck people after mounting the pavement just after midnight BST outside Muslim Welfare House, near Finsbury Park Mosque. A 48-year-old man has been arrested.

Home Secretary Amber Rudd said police were treating it as a "terrorist incident".

Eyewitness Abdul Rahman said the driver said he wanted to "kill all Muslims".....

 

[cambsy]

I'm not surprised this has happened, with recent terrorist attacks, islamaphobic attacks are going to soar, with tensions now really high, and people afraid and angry, some are going to fight back, happened before and will happen again as long as terrorist attacks happen, really bad situation, but cant see it improving as long as terrorist attacks happen.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

This looks uncomfortably like a misguided revenge attack; that's the last thing we need to start happening.

 

[PhilipRhayader]

My heart goes out to those killed, injured and their loved ones.

We must unite against such misguided evil-doers.

 

[DarloRich]

more lunatic terror attacks. Madness.

 

[Tetchytyke]

This looks uncomfortably like a evil terrorist misguided revenge attack; that's the last thing we need to start happening.

Fixed that for you.

But yes, the very last thing we need. Thoughts to all.

 

[AlterEgo]

This attack was a long time in coming. No surprise Finsbury Park mosque was chosen by the terrorist, with its links to Islamic terror.

We'll see if the Government chooses to have a minute's silence for this. (Personally I despise that kind of stuff but let's see if the victims get parity of esteem with others...)

 

[Bromley boy]

Fixed that for you.

But yes, the very last thing we need. Thoughts to all.

It's certainly an evil terrorist attack, but the previous poster was also right that the motive for this particular attack, given what we know about the perpetrator and the victims, may well be a misguided attempt at revenge for what happened in London Bridge and Manchester recently.

It's morally equivalent of those attacks and of course perfectly plays into Isis' hands as these kind of "revenge attacks" will only sow more division.

 

[Railops]

Another sectarian attack in London. Thoughts & prayers with victims.

Tweets Gerry Adams - at least unlike Lineker and Lily Allen Adams is an acknowledged expert in the field of sectarian terrorism.

 

[najaB]

Tweets Gerry Adams...

I'm quite sure there's something ironic about this, but can't quite put my finger on it.

 

[najaB]

I wonder if the attacker is a long-standing member of the anti-Islamic community or a recently radicalised convert? Will there be calls for members of the 'white community' to stand up against this kind of violence?

 

[Bromley boy]

I wonder if the attacker is a long-standing member of the anti-Islamic community or a recently radicalised convert? Will there be calls for members of the 'white community' to stand up against this kind of violence?

I imagine this attack will (rightly) be roundly condemned from all sides.

The "white community" is a more disparate group than the Islamic community(ies) who subscribe to a common religion. For this reason there aren't really "white community leaders" we can appeal to in the same way as there are Islamic community leaders such as Immams, leaders of Islamic community groups, for example.

I expect the path the radicalisation is similar for terorrists of all ilks. Disaffection, anger, a sense of being left behind and looking for a common identity.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

One of those being interviewed made comparisons with the time the emergency services took to attend in comparison to the time they took to attend the other recent terrorist attack in London.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The Jo Cox murder showed that white extremists are quite prepared to commit murder.

 

[najaB]

I imagine this attack will (rightly) be roundly condemned from all sides.

I know. I'm just wondering if the British media will do the right thing, or follow the American example of only calling it terrorism when the perpetrator is brown or Muslim. So far they seem to be doing okay at calling it what it is.

The "white community" is a more disparate group than the Islamic community(ies) who subscribe to a common religion.

Agreed. However, there isn't really a 'spokesperson for all Muslims' either - I don't get why it isn't enough for people of any faithsto decry such acts as unwelcome in our society regardless of religion or ethnicity.

I expect the path the radicalisation is similar for terorrists of all ilks. Disaffection, anger, a sense of being left behind and looking for a common identity.

Indeed it is. But again, we only hear of 'radicalisation' in the context of Islamists, never (or very rarely) in the context of white supremacists or Christian terrorists.

 

[AlterEgo]

I expect the path the radicalisation is similar for terorrists of all ilks. Disaffection, anger, a sense of being left behind and looking for a common identity.

I expect there won't be frank discussion about how the terrorist's concerns and motives may or may not be justified/understood, and may or may not be influenced by government policy - regardless of how disgusting an act he perpetrated. Contrast this to the open discussions we have about Islamic (or, nostalgically, Irish) terrorism.

All that will happen is that the attacker will be universally condemned, dismissed as a lunatic, and anyone who dares say "well, let's look at what motivated him and see if we should change or rethink our policy" will be silenced and called a racist Islamophobe.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

One of those being interviewed made comparisons with the time the emergency services took to attend in comparison to the time they took to attend the other recent terrorist attack in London.

What comparison? I'd be happy to explain it to you.

 

[AlterEgo]

However, there isn't really a 'spokesperson for all Muslims' either

Instead, we have a multicultural policy where public money is spent effectively propping up self-proclaimed "community leaders", regardless of whether those people are qualified to represent their community in the way mainstream political discourse would accept. (Note with Islamic communities, it's generally older blokes and clerics, and almost never a woman, and definitely never a gay person, for example - we'd decry that practice if it came from "whiteness")

 

[Busaholic]

One of those being interviewed made comparisons with the time the emergency services took to attend in comparison to the time they took to attend the other recent terrorist attack in London.

First of all, a lot more armed police would have been within fast driving distance of London Bridge than they would of Seven Sisters Road. Also, I happened to be watching BBC News Channel when the LB attack took place, and they had cameras there virtually straightaway, and though the police were on the scene very quickly it took a bit longer before ambulances were in evidence, in quantity at least. Of course, if you witness such terrible things and are awaiting emergency services five minutes would seem like a lifetime. It is a forgotten factor, but the Kings Cross tube fire might not have caused so many casualties if the two fire engines at Euston Road fire station a quarter mile from KX had not been out on a 'shout' at the time, and the initial engines on the scene were from Soho, a lot further away.

 

[DarloRich]

Surely we need to look at what radicalised this individual.

We would call for the removal of preachers of a hateful extremist Islamic message. Should we not do the same for "preachers" of a hateful white supremacist message?

 

[NorthernSpirit]

What's the chance that the bloke in question, who mowed down these Muslims, is an athiest?

With what has happened recently I think that we've hit a tipping point where some will now react, others just carry on as normal. But as Sadiq Khan has stated after the Westminster attack that "its part and parcel of living in a big city".

 

[Bromley boy]

However, there isn't really a 'spokesperson for all Muslims' either - I don't get why it isn't enough for people of any faithsto decry such acts as unwelcome in our society regardless of religion or ethnicity.

I suppose the distinction is that acts perpetrated by islamists are purported to be carried out in the name of Islam. Therefore the best way to counter this message is for members of the Islamic community to speak out to distance the religion from these acts. This is something that seems to be happening more and more which is to be welcomed.

Someone committing an islamophic attack isn't carrying out the attack in the name of any identifiable wider cause or religion, they're just a "radical Islamophobe."

I appreciate it's quite a tenuous distinction and, contrary to what they may believe, a radical islamophobe has a great deal more in common with an Islamist than they do with most right thinking people of whatever religion.

 

[najaB]

What's the chance that the bloke in question, who mowed down these Muslims, is an athiest?

An interesting question. My gut feeling is that 'radical atheist' is an oxymoron - atheism being generally associated with a level of rational thought that would preclude being a terrorist, but I'm probably wrong.

 

[Bromley boy]

Surely we need to look at what radicalised this individual.

We would call for the removal of preachers of a hateful extremist Islamic message. Should we not do the same for "preachers" of a hateful white supremacist message?

We should.

However someone who carries out an Islaphobic attack isn't necessarily a white supremacist. There would presumably attack white Muslims, of whom there are many, just as happily.

 

[najaB]

However someone who carries out an Islaphobic attack isn't necessarily a white supremacist. There would presumably attack white Muslims, of whom there are many, just as happily.

They see white Muslims as traitors to the White race.

Most white supremacists identify themselves as defenders of Christianity (which is somewhat ironic given that if Christ actually lived, he was Jewish and almost certainly brown-skinned).

 

[DarloRich]

We should.

However someone who carries out an Islaphobic attack isn't necessarily a white supremacist. There would presumably attack white Muslims, of whom there are many, just as happily.

agreed - I was struggling for a term other than "massive chuffing barm pot" to describe the individual involved.

 

[Bromley boy]

They see white Muslims as traitors to the White race.

Most white supremacists identify themselves as defenders of Christianity (which is somewhat ironic given that if Christ actually lived, he was Jewish and almost certainly brown-skinned).

Surely it's quite possible for this kind of attack to be motivated simply by hatred of a particular group rather than defence of another religion. I don't think we can assume that all islamophic attacks are carried out by those purporting to defend Christianity.

Agreed, of course Christianity sadly has a track record of not being particularly kind to brown people.

 

[najaB]

Surely it's quite possible for this kind of attack to be motivated simply by hatred of a particular group rather than defence of another religion.

I agree. I wasn't making a comment about this particular individual, just commenting on how white supremacists can self-justify attacking White people.

 

[Bromley boy]

An interesting question. My gut feeling is that 'radical atheist' is an oxymoron - atheism being generally associated with a level of rational thought that would preclude being a terrorist, but I'm probably wrong.

It is an interesting question.

However I'd argue that terrorism is a perfectly rational. It's calculated to advance a particular cause or objective in the most bloody and dramatic way possible.

ETA spring to mind as a terrorist group who, as socialist Basque separatists, didn't carry out their terrorism in the name of any particular religion.

EDIT: I'd (perhaps controversially) argue the same about the IRA. They were Roman Catholic, certainly not astheists, however their religion was incidental to the political motivations for their terrorism.

 

[Tetchytyke]

The "white community" is a more disparate group than the Islamic community(ies) who subscribe to a common religion.

59% of the population identify as "Christian".

Doesn't sound that disparate to me.