[Closed] Terrorism

Well I'll start the ball. Totally agree on another thread.

If 25000 + are know why has there not been any action taken against said numbers?

Ban travel to/from know jihad locations.

Ban travel to/from know jihad locations.

Thanks Zokes.

Passports can still be stamped.

A good start would be to review the close relationship of Her Majesty's Government with Saudi Arabia:

[url= http://www.newsweek.com/uk-report-terror-saudi-arabia-public-finding-618508 ]U.K. Terrorism Report on Saudi Arabia May Be Kept Secret[/url]

the Home Office not only declined to disclose any information regarding its findings, it suggested it may never do so, due to the "very sensitive" nature of the results. which are believed to contain references to Saudi Arabia, a close ally of the U.K. and known sponsor of ultraconservative Wahhabist Sunni Muslim ideology around the world.

Not to mention other influential governments...

In Washington, President Donald Trump's ascension to the White House initially appeared devastating to Saudi interests, as Trump had accused the monarchy of propagating radical Islamist ideology throughout the region and abroad. Trump, who signed a $110 billion arms deal with Saudi Arabia during a trip to the country last week, pointed out only last year that 15 of the 19 hijackers connected to Al-Qaeda and responsible for the 9/11 attacks actually came from Saudi Arabia.

Multiple passports...

Not when your don't want it and when you go cross country. What do you think people are not doing? As the stats go you need to be lucky every time, they need to be lucky once.

If 25000 + are know why has there not been any action taken against said numbers?

Good question, this is well worth a read:

[url= http://markcurtis.info/2017/06/03/the-manchester-bombing-as-blowback-the-latest-evidence/ ]The Manchester Bombing as Blowback: The latest evidence[/url]

The evidence suggests that the barbaric Manchester bombing, which killed 22 innocent people on May 22nd, is a case of blowback on British citizens arising at least partly from the overt and covert actions of British governments. The British state therefore has a serious case to answer. We focus primarily here on UK policies towards Libya but also touch on some of those related to Iraq and Syria.

In summary, the evidence so far shows that there are six inter-related aspects of blowback:

1. Salman Abedi and his father were members of a Libyan dissident group – the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) – covertly supported by the UK to assassinate Qadafi in 1996. At this time, the LIFG was an affiliate of Osama Bin Laden’s al-Qaeda and LIFG leaders had various connections to this terror network.

2. Members of the LIFG were facilitated by the British ‘security services’ to travel to Libya to fight Qadafi in 2011. Both Salman Abedi and his father, Ramadan, were among those who travelled to fight at this time (although there is no evidence that their travel was personally facilitated or encouraged by the security services).

3. A large number of LIFG fighters in Libya in 2011 had earlier fought alongside the Islamic State of Iraq – the al-Qaeda entity which later established a presence in Syria and became the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). These fighters were among those recruited into the British-backed anti-Qadafi rebellion.

4. UK covert action in Libya in 2011 included approval of and support to Qatar’s arming and backing of opposition forces, which included support to hardline Islamist groups; this fuelled jihadism in Libya.

5. One of the groups armed/supported by Qatar in 2011 was the February 17th Martyrs Brigade which, some reports suggest, was the organisation which Ramadan Abedi joined in 2011 to fight Qadafi.

6. Qatar’s arms supplies to Libya in 2011 also found their way to Islamist fighters in Syria, including groups affiliated with al-Qaeda and ISIS.

The evidence points to the LIFG being seen by the UK as a proxy militia to promote its foreign policy objectives. Whitehall also saw Qatar as a proxy to provide boots on the ground in Libya in 2011, even as it empowered hardline Islamist groups.

Both David Cameron, then Prime Minister, and Theresa May – who was Home Secretary in 2011 when Libyan radicals were encouraged to fight Qadafi – clearly have serious questions to answer. We believe an independent public enquiry is urgently needed.

The evidence suggests that British actions in three different theatres – Libya, Iraq and Syria – cannot be viewed in isolation

Passports can still be stamped.

It's not usual to have your passport stamped if you're illegally crossing between countries and don't wish it known that you were there.

As for locking up 25,000 suspects, at best all this will achieve exactly what it did in NI: it'll be excellent recruitment material for the terrorists, and probably facilitate a lot of knowledge transfer between suspects in custody. Neither of these seem good outcomes.

So what do we do zokes? Leave them on the streets? This needs to be come down on hard, how many more innocent people need to die before the government acts?

When these things happen, I always have the same thoughts.
What are these guys trying to achieve? What do they want to happen? They kill themselves or the police kill them so they never get to see it. you have to assume they are angry with our country's actions, especially abroad. But how does killing some random punters on the street make a difference. Go kill the politicians who make these decisions? You might be stabbing a green party supporter.

So you want to come down on people without proof? Based on what they are thinking? Grace d swooping arrests like those that filled Guantanamo with people arrested and released with no charges and very little in way of apology.
How did that make it better for the world?

A little background on internment last time round with the IRA:

[url= https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Demetrius ]Op Demetrius[/url]

As I recall it was quite a useful recruitment aid for the IRA.

racist generalisations

I was recently called 'racist' by a friend (half-jokingly) for my raising an eyebrow at Saudi Arabian visitors, along with a terrorist/'bomb' joke. I responded with 'a country is not a 'race'. Neither is a religion'. Neither, for that matter, is an aittitude/culture - even if co-opted by racial supremacists. ie you are not automatically insulting 'white people' if you speak out against the C of E. Likewise you are not by default insulting 'brown-people' if you speak out against Islam. Surely it is far more offensive for a Muslim to hear an 'insult' against Islam. That is one of the motives for murderers. The 'racism' thing is a horrible sideshow full of farkwits on both 'sides'. It doesn't help matters, but it's not the key issue.

The 'race' thing is too-often invoked and is sadly instrumental in closing down open debates about religious, cultural and political tensions.

Saudi Arabia. End of discussion.

So what do we do zokes? Leave them on the streets? This needs to be come down on hard, how many more innocent people need to die before the government acts?

Stop killing innocent civilians in the Middle East and Libya would be a start. We could spend some on the £200bn we're wasting on Trident to give domestic security services the resources they need to act swiftly and accurately.

And a spot of perspective would also be useful. These incidents are isolated, and the risk posed remains very low. Panicking and knee-jerk reactions are exactly what they want. Don't play into their hands.

Why not get talk to them, question their motivations, provide alternative ways of seeing things/thinking, try to unbrainwash them, try to get their families/leaders to challenge/deal with them.

The 23,000 are potential threats but that doesn't mean you can just lock up people who could potentially do something. We would need a lot more prisons if we did....

A good start would be to show respect to their cause.. calling people cowards and losers when they have given their lives seems a bit crass. Then we can look at education and understanding of their cause. One man's terrorist is another man's partner and all that

A good start would be to show respect to their cause.. calling people cowards and losers when they have given their lives seems a bit crass.

WTAF! 😯

A good start would be to show respect to their cause.. calling people cowards and losers when they have given their lives seems a bit crass.

I'm quite happy to put effort into understanding their cause, indeed you'll see I allude to this by highlighting our actions in the Middle East. However, the individuals in question were cowards and losers. They attacked unarmed civilians. There aren't many more cowardly behaviours than that.

A good start would be to show respect to their cause

Please elaborate?

When we stop sucking on the same Wahhabi teat that nourishes hardline Islamic terrorism, we might be in a better moral position.

When we stop providing support in the UK groups with hardline terrorist leanings in order to fight proxy wars in countries like Libya, perhaps members of those groups won't be bringing the death and destruction we export back home with them.

The cynical foreign policies of the Arab Spring have led to devastation and the deaths of thousands of innocents, and power vacuums where hardline groups can flourish. The woman offering 'strong and stable' leadership was one of those on whose watch this happened.

When will we ever learn?

They attacked unarmed civilians. There aren't many more cowardly behaviours than that.

Except maybe doing it remotely by advanced weaponry, then pouring yourself a beer afterwards?

They attacked unarmed civilians.

Just the same as most countries who engage in unnecessary wars, including the UK. But that is clearly different...

Except maybe doing it remotely by advanced weaponry, then pouring yourself a beer afterwards?

I'm not arguing with that. As you'll see I've stated twice already.

They kill themselves or the police kill them so they never get to see it. you have to assume they are angry with our country's actions, especially abroad. But how does killing some random punters on the street make a difference.

To understand this you have to understand the ideology they follow.
Before anyone chimes in about ordinary Muslims or moderate Muslims that's not what we're talking about here....these people are extremist in their views, they believe in a literal translation of the Koran and they believe that death to non believers is the only mission goal....they couldn't care less whether it's Teresa May or an 8 yr old Ariana Grande fan they kill, they're both infidels and both deserve to die in their warped views.

You could pull out of the Middle East and it would still continue because there is a small but viscous sect within Islam that honestly believe their role is to take the fight to non believers, kill or convert non believers and spread Islam...by force if necessary.
You can't reason with that.

It's not a race issue, it's a religion/ideology issue....how to sort it?....buggered if I know, there may well be too many people in this country with these views for it to ever be sorted now, I've resigned myself to the fact that Islam will become the dominant religion in this country....hopefully not in my lifetime but the birth rate among followers of Islam far outstrips those who don't follow that religion....given how ultra-PC the general population, police and politicians have become I think these attacks will become more frequent and that people who don't follow Islam will end up dead or emigrating.

Shame that such a backwards ideology has taken such a firm foothold in Europe.

5 pages and then total lockdown and the phrase terrorist added to the swear filter.

I dunno, if it keeps that kind of thing off the main London Bridge thread it will have served its purpose.

Well Mrs May has just said "it is time to say enough is enough". So I imagine she has a plan and will have this all sorted out shortly.

Deviant: I'm confused. You go to great lengths in your first paragraph to correctly identify the root cause as a small group of nutters who are not representative of the hundreds of millions of peaceful followers of the Islamic faith.

You then go on to hypothecate about a (seemingly irrational) fear of the religion in question becoming the main religion in the UK. Is this a "some of my best mates are muslims, but..." post?

Top post deviant

A good start would be to show respect to their cause.. calling people cowards and losers when they have given their lives seems a bit crass.

Gobsmacked.

At the moment, few of these nutters have access to any significant weaponry. Last night they used a Transit and some knives.

What is really a concern, is what happens if they manage to get a decent supply of guns and explosive, like the NI terrorists?

Imagine the carnage last night if they had even just shotguns? Potentially dozens of deaths and hundreds of wounded.

given how ultra-PC the general population, police and politicians have become

I've resigned myself to the fact that Islam will become the dominant religion in this country

PMSL!

I'm more worried that they may attack even softer targets with their easily accessed weapons.

At the moment, few of these nutters have access to any significant weaponry. Last night they used a Transit and some knives.

I know, given they only had knives I don't know why the police couldn't taser and arrest them, rather than murder them in another illegal extra-judicial killing

Oh I wonder if it might be to do with the fake bomb vests they were apparently wearing.

Disgusting what is happening.

Understand them? They want to cause hatred and dislike the West's values.

I know, given they only had knives I don't know why the police couldn't taser and arrest them, rather than murder them in another illegal extra-judicial killing

You are taking the piss, right.
My sarcasmometer is reading not sure.

God told Tony Blair to go to war, God told them to go to war.

Who started it first ?

And since when has dropping bombs on targets in the Middle East been less cowardly than killing people in the U.K. ?

The world is a screwed up place. IMO the U.K. doesn't have an unblemished record abroad, so can we get upset with them when they get upset with us?

I would have thought droppping a bomb from an aircraft is a lot more cowardly than being able to kill people and then blow yourself up. But of course our propagandists wouldn't want us to think that.

The whole thing is one big sorry mess 🙁

ISIS magazine - Rumiyah: "target them with edged weapons, firearms, vehicle ramming, in clubs & restaurants and bars."

You can't reason with that....pretty much a template for what happened last night.

I dislike all religion, it has no place in a modern society that believes in equality, discovery through science, freedom of speech etc...sadly this is the third terrorist attack in 3 months in the UK (Westminster bridge, Manchester and now Borough market)...it's not going to end any time soon sadly, celebrities tweeting about 'standing strong' and politicians telling us to carry on as normal won't fix it....neither will people lighting candles at the inevitable vigil that will take place some time next week.

It's pathetic, the Rotherham rape gangs were brought to justice once the police and authorities got over their crippling political correctness and the same needs to happen with Islamic terrorism.

ninfan ... arrest them, put them in prison where they can spread their horrid beliefs, then release them after a few years on good behaviour?

There was a guy from Blair's war mongering government on Europe 1 commenting this morning. My thoughts went along the same lines, Funkydunk "you hypocritical *, who *ing started it".

Some people should keep a low profile when journalists go looking for specialists to comment on the latest atrocities, whoever has committed them.

It's pathetic, the Rotherham rape gangs were brought to justice once the police and authorities got over their crippling political correctness and the same needs to happen with Islamic terrorism.

On that theory a lot of white men would be in prison for their high likelihood to commit serious domestic violence.

small but viscous sect

It really is all about the oil?

I know, given they only had knives I don't know why the police couldn't taser and arrest them, rather than murder them in another illegal extra-judicial killing
You are taking the piss, right.
My sarcasmometer is reading not sure.

I guess ninfan is just sneaking in another slur of Corbyn on the back of this.

I don't do religion as it is at odds with modern thinking,
Womens equality and gay rights.

A non violent bakery owner has scorn poured over him for refusing to bake a Bert and Ernie cake, but if he had chosen to stab to death innocent people out on a Saturday night, some one on here would condem calling him a loser crass. It's a crazy world we live in.

Oh I wonder if it might be to do with the fake bomb vests they were apparently wearing.

Ah, bulky jackets, wires hanging out - we've been here before haven't we?

Frankenstein - Member
What is the motive of the attack?
What do they want?

These (relatively) small-scale attacks may spread terror, but if the overall aim of Daesh / whoever genuinely is the downfall of western values and society it sure isn't going to achieve that with vans and knives...

Still all a bit "I'm not a racist, but...", Deviant.

Problem is, even if you do something like deport the supposed 3000 terrorists living in this country, all you do is generate anger amongst already angry young disillusioned men who just see it as yet another attack on them. So more home grown terrorists pop up.

With terrorism done in the name of Islam the problem is deep rooted in history, and yes we've had a hand in it. Could argue the blame goes back to the Crusades. Though it's excuses to fight. For some reason some parts of the middle east seem to just simmer away with so much anger and not just against the west but against each other.

There are 23000 would be, could be terrorist in this country, we can only monitor 3000 of them.

It's a strange old world when you find yourself thinking "maybe having Saddam and Gaddaffi wasn't that bad after all". 🙁

At least when a country is in the grip of a tyrant who will do anything to preserve his own position 'we' can have some leverage over the situation.

I'm not sure what the solution is, to be honest. Carpet bomb large tracts of the Middle East back to the Stone Age? How would that reduce the likelihood of an attack here? Impose 'our man' in power. Again, not sure how that would help. We can't negotiate with a group whose stated goal is our destruction. Let's say we could 'negotiate'. What would the settlement be? Here's x thousand square miles of the Middle East where international law doesn't function and you can rule it how you like - murder, torture etc?

People are right to distinguish this breed of terrorism from ETA / IRA / UVF etc. For two main reasons. Firstly, whatever you think of them as individuals, they were fighting [u]for[/u] something. The likes of Daesh are only fighting [u]against[/u] what they don't like. Secondly, given the 'cause', the older terrorist groups didn't actively seek death for themselves.

This is what makes this new breed of terrorism so frightening - its utter nihilism.

There are 23000 would be, could be terrorist in this country, we can only monitor 3000 of them.

Were the people involved in the last 3 attacks all within that 23,000 as if there were they we correctly have the potential people marked out. So the answer is to monitor the other 20,000. (or better still also talk to them as I suggested in the previous page)

What do you think we need to be able to more effectively monitor them, the tories seem to be struggling with the concept of additional resources required.

Ah, bulky jackets, wires hanging out - we've been here before haven't we?

So you would rather the police risk their lives and those of others in the vicinity by using a tazer?

How do you know the vests are fake?

Not sure what spin you are putting on this?

Not sure what spin you are putting on this?

The IRAs cause itself was not evil. A republic Ireland in its self is not evil, many countries are republics, USA and France and many people in England would have us a republic. But their means to try and bring this about were evil,

Isis's cause is evil so any comparison between the two does not stand.

So the answer is to monitor the other 20,000

Ok, you monitor them

Then what?

Does 'monitoring them' somehow stop them getting into a van and driving into London? Does it prevent them buying Chapatti flour?

Does 'monitoring them' somehow stop them getting into a van and driving into London?

What do you think we need to be able to more effectively monitor them, the tories seem to be struggling with the concept of additional resources required.

What purpose does bulk monitoring/surveillance by GCHQ and NSA serve in all of this?

It's been going on since before 9/11 in one way or another and still has minimal impact on many aspects of terrorism and organized crime; why?

And why, since they have such extensive powers already, is May calling for internet regulation, but not addressing that her majesty's government actively supports the root cause of the wahhabist extremist ideology?

[img] [/img]

given how ultra-PC the general population, police and politicians have become I think these attacks will become more frequent and that people who don't follow Islam will end up dead or emigrating.

Ah, I see: So it's all our own fault, is it?

The thing that puzzles me about these attacks is why they're automatically labelled 'terrorist'. Many are carried out by lone-wolf nutters who for whatever reasons have worked themselves up into such a state of hatred of the society they live in that they're willing to kill members of that society, and themselves, in order to do something, however futile, about it. There doesn't seem to be any real political motivation, just a hate-fuelled willingness to kill and injure people that they don't like. How are these acts any different to your traditional serial killer or mentally ill nutter who goes on a rampage like happens from time to time? Seems to me that giving them the label 'terrorist' elevates them to a position that not only gives them some sort of warped justification, but might also encourage and inspire others to do the same.

JHJ - worth reading:

The thing that puzzles me about these attacks is why they're automatically labelled 'terrorist'. Many are carried out by lone-wolf nutters who for whatever reasons have worked themselves up into such a state of hatred of the society they live in that they're willing to kill members of that society, and themselves, in order to do something, however futile, about it. There doesn't seem to be any real political motivation, just a hate-fuelled willingness to kill and injure people that they don't like. How are these acts any different to your traditional serial killer or mentally ill nutter who goes on a rampage like happens from time to time? Seems to me that giving them the label 'terrorist' elevates them to a position that not only gives them some sort of warped justification, but might also encourage and inspire others to do the same.

The terrorism label also gives the government a lovely mandate to spend more money on surveillance whilst cutting funding to front-line resources and doing multi-million/billion pound arms deals with the likes of Saudi Arabia. It also helps the PM look "strong and stable".

Do you know where the Home Secretary, Amber Rudd, was yesterday?

This is doing the rounds on Facebook,

Dr. Peter Hammond’s book: Slavery, Terrorism and Islam: Islam is not a religion, nor is it a cult. In its fullest form, it is a complete, total, 100% system of life. Islam has religious, legal, political, economic, social, and military components. The religious component is a beard for all of the other components.
Islamization begins when there are sufficient Muslims in a country to agitate for their religious privileges.
When politically correct, tolerant, and culturally diverse societies agree to Muslim demands for their religious privileges, some of the other components tend to creep in as well..

Here’s how it works:
As long as the Muslim population remains around or under 2% in any given country, they will for the most part be regarded as a peace-loving minority, and not as a threat to other citizens.
It is a trick.
United States — Muslim 0..6%
Australia — Muslim 1.5%
Canada — Muslim 1.9%
China — Muslim 1.8%
Italy — Muslim 1.5%
Norway — Muslim 1.8%
At 2% to 5%, they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups, often with major
recruiting from the jails and among street gangs. This is happening in:
Denmark — Muslim 2%
Germany — Muslim 3.7%
United Kingdom — Muslim 2.7%
Spain — Muslim 4%
Thailand — Muslim 4.6%
From 5% on, they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population.

For example, they will push for the introduction of halal food (clean by Islamic standards), thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims.They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature halal on their shelves — along with threats for failure to comply.
At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves (within their ghettos)
under Sharia, the Islamic Law.
The ultimate goal of Islamists is to establish Sharia law over the entire world.
When Muslims approach 10% of the population, they tend to increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions.
In Paris, we are already seeing car-burnings. Any non Muslim action offends Islam, and results in uprisings and threats, such as in Amsterdam, with opposition to Mohammed cartoons and films about Islam. Such tensions are seen daily, particularly in Muslim sections. FRANCE

After reaching 20%, nations can expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings, and the burnings of Christian churches and Jewish synagogues. Think what is going on in Turkey now, after the so called coupe attempt.
At 40%, nations experience widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks,
From 60%, nations experience unfettered persecution of non-believers of all other religions (including non-conforming Muslims), sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon, and Jizya, the tax placed on infidels.
After 80%, expect daily intimidation and violent jihad, some State-run ethnic cleansing, and even some genocide, as these nations drive out the infidels, and move toward 100% Muslim.

This whole situation is a gigantic mess. I agree with one of the posts above, what do we do? Flatten the whole of Syria etc or try to develop economic growth in those areas instead?

I'm stuffed if I know. What a mess. It might sound like a strange link but with climate change affectin the Middle East and North Africa means there is something like 100million people that will be displaced into Europe.

Sad times ahead I think

Hmmmnnn.

A quick google suggests Dr Hammond MAY have his own agenda...

chip - Member 
Isis's cause is evil so any comparison between the two does not stand.

Evil to us. To them they believe we are the evil ones. According to their fanatical beliefs we are so immoral and corrupt (potential truth in that) that they have to wipe us from the planet.

Crazy evil murderer is the lone nut job who blows away kids in a school like in the US. Though even then there's a mental health cause behind it.

Daesh prays on vulnerable angry men who are looking for a cause to fight for and sucks them in with propaganda and brainwashes them. Are they then evil, or just brainwashed slaves to their cause?

Still all a bit "I'm not a racist, but...", Deviant

....and I couldn't care less.

I learned a long time ago that some people use accusations of racism, sexism etc to stifle any kind of debate on a difficult topic.

Daesh prays on vulnerable angry men who are looking for a cause to fight for and sucks them in with propaganda and brainwashes them. Are they then evil, or just brainwashed slaves to their cause?

I read some good pieces about prevent, certain areas of Islam with the UK ran what would be considered under normal circumstance an amazing counter PR campaign to discredit it. It worked, absolutely destroyed the good work it does. That's where the government need to wake up, this is a war of words, and we're losing.

Plenty of muslims who work in trying to identify and 'unprogram' radicalised individuals, they need more support and help. They need to be given centre stage to address the nation not politicians and their hollow sound bites. For starters anyway.

Does 'monitoring them' somehow stop them getting into a van and driving into London?

Yep, as you would be monitoring them so would have been aware of their plans. We would also have the resources to talk to them, support people who would help them etc,.

....and I couldn't care less.

Most racists don't. Pity, it does devalue your contribution

I disagree Zokes. it may appear that way to you, your sense of what is and isn't racist is subjective. I'm of Asian heritage, my family hails from ****stan.

The labels need to be removed because we are talking about an ideology. A spade is a spade, you can call it a garden spoon if that fits, but you still dig holes in the garden with it. To ethier tend your petunias or bury bodies.

There needs to be an open and honest dialogue about the perversion of an ideology to push men to commit acts of violence. Chances are things will get heated and close to the bone, that may make people uncomfortable, but I'd prefer you offended than a 10" knife plunged into your chest.

Plenty of muslims who work in trying to identify and 'unprogram' radicalised individuals, they need more support and help. They need to be given centre stage to address the nation

This seems like a good place to start. The media also has a tendency, IMO, to sensationalise these acts. I don't even know if they mean to do it but the news seems to be almost presented as entertainment and that needs to stop. Posting pictures of a dead terrorist putting his ****ing bins out has no place in the story.

Stopping support for the regimes that help to finance the groups behind the acts would also be a good idea. Taking photo opportunities with the Saudi Royals, buying their oil and supplying them with arms would seem to be counter productive to me. I know I'm being naive, but surely cutting off revenue streams has to help.

Edit - Moose is talking a hell of a lot of sense.

we are talking about an ideology.

At least somebody gets it.

As said before, it's not the person I hate, it's the ideology....couldn't care less about skin colour but I care very much indeed when people are plunging knives into women's chests and declaring: "this is for Allah"....that concerns me greatly and it has nothing to do with race and everything to do with a warped belief system.

that concerns me greatly and it has nothing to do with race and everything to do with a warped belief system.

People are using religion for their own means and trying to manipulate others. To simplify it to religion is a mistake

So interpretation of a religion to suit ones own needs then?