Giles Fraser

[David Johnson]

On the Daily Politics, parish preacher, Giles Fraser

"Understanding the violence of last week is partly about understanding the geopolitical situation. You cannot discuss that violence without discussing the Iraq War or the Algerian War. I am not trying to get religion off the hook. However, religion is a question which drags in issues of politics and identity which themselves can be the animating force for violence and aggression."

A perceptive and intelligent comment which explains why we have radical Islamists carrying out assassinations in the name of Islam whilst for example, 99.99 whatever % of the British Muslim population are not.

[Essex Lad]

Algerian War? You sure?

[andy at handiwork]

From a French perspective, yes. Very important with consequences decades after.

[Essex Lad]

I'm not sure a war that ended in 1962 has much relevance in 2015. It was only last week that the French suffered and while the Chuckle brothers and the black bloke's wife were both of Algerian heritage, I would guess that's merely coincidence.

[David Johnson]

Yes. Andy gives you the answer.

Some more info

This is part of the geopolitical background



And as for identity, many terrorists come from broken homes, tough upbringings, jail records, radicalisation in jail etc. etc.

As Fraser says this is not to let religion off the hook. To say their assassinations had nothing to do with religion is nonsense.

[Sam Slater]

The French were brutal in Algeria. But if this was about Algerians frustrated at the treatment they receive in France, or past wars, they could have targeted political or military targets to make that point. Why pick on satirists who just happen to have depicted their prophet? No. This parish preacher is clearly talking out of his arse to spread the blame around from religion. He knows that the more people get pissed off with militant Islamic nutjobs, it turns the public further away from all religions.

Does politics play a role? Sure. But there's a reason why a Nigerian born British terrorist who's just beheaded someone on the streets of London, calls Afghanistan 'our lands', and that reason isn't political. He's British of African descent. Afghanistan isn't in any way 'his land' unless he's using religion to identify with Afghans who are mainly Muslim like him.

He didn't behead anyone in a war against imperialist China still occupying Tibet, or the treatment of the indigenous people of Argentina by their European occupiers. Or even stand by the Hawaiians against those nasty Americans. Nah.......it's about religion alright and I even posted on here the verses in the Quran and stories in the Hadith that justified what they did.

[David Johnson]

"This parish preacher is clearly talking out of his arse "

As usual, a nuanced discussion on this topic goes completely over your head, addled by your absolute, fundamentalist hatred of Islam. You are the absolute Imam of Secularism.

Fraser is not "letting religion off the hook" as he clearly stated and obviously, terrible atrocities are committed in the name of Islam as they have been over Christianity through the ages as Fraser pointed out.

Again, the point you have never been able to cope with either directly to me or via a reply to a third party (your preferred way ever since you had a hissy fit) is to explain why a religion which has many, many devout believers in this country has not led to a huge number of executions, assassinations and the streets of Birmingham, Bradford etc. running with blood on a nightly basis.

To repeat, Islam cannot be let off the hook, but in addition there are other key factors which Fraser's quote accurately describes.

[Essex Lad]

Yes but a wrong one. I suspect I know more about Algeria and its history than anyone else on this forum. I am also probably the only one who has spent considerable time there...

[David Johnson]

Best to drop a line to Robert Fisk then who wrote the article I link to. He has specialised in Middle Eastern and North African affairs for over 20 years

[David Johnson]

Can we take the following as read, please?

"It's a shame he spends more time having a go at me than sympathising with innocent people who are killed by the religion he defends with such gusto. I guess we know where his priorities lie."

"I've said it before and I'll say it again: he's obsessed with me"

" find it disgusting (an often overused word, but which I'm using in all sincerity here) that David will use the response and anger at the death of 12 innocent people as an opportunity to troll me. It's distasteful - but, sadly, all too predictable."

"Yet more questions from David about me, when this thread shouldn't be about me and he knows I will not engage with him due to his constant disingenuousness and, on a few occasions, outright bully tactics in trying to ostracise and turn other forumites against me."

Thanks.