London - Suspected Terrorist Incident

space_man

blaze1 wrote: »

They are and rightly so, but there is a way to go about it. Hammered & balaclavered up is not it.

tbh i think British people have shown immense patience and tolerance.
if this crap was happening down the road from you, i wonder how forgiving you'ld be?

fishy fishy

Ford Juicy Smokehouse wrote: »

One of my best friends in London is a Pakistani Muslim. One of his (now ex) Facebook friends, a Pakistani-born guy who came to England to study, used to post statuses like 'fck this country and everyone in it', 'English women are all sluts who deserve to be raped' - maybe people like that? Who, you know, show indications that they have absolutely no respect for the society they live in and want to destroy it?

are you serious??? That is probably one of the most ridiculous posts on this thread. I do sometimes think you post things just for the mere reaction. Whatever gives you your kicks tho.

It reminds me of the old nugget........I'm not racist, but..........

SB2013

Cathal Cloch wrote: »

And the effect is the radicalisation of tens of thousands of people hell-bent on revenge (see above). So it very much is relevant.

And if a hundred people were shot then it would have the same effect. The method, wether it be bomb, gun or drone is irrelevent, it's the purpose and result of it's use that is the thing to agree or disagree with.

Cathal Cloch wrote: »

This is the view that keeps sleepwalking us into more and more war and grief in the west. Forget their motivations. We're the good guys they're the bad guys. I know your song off by heart.

Because the discussion around motives is not justification. Well spotted.

You are the one that keeps confusing justification and moivation. Let's remember that the original comment that I posted which you responded to was that there was no justification for this murder. It was you who disagreed with this and introduced motive as a possible justification. Now you want to seperate the two. Make up your mind.

Maybe you could give a clear answer to this question. What justification was there for running down and decapitating this off duty soldier?

Cathal Cloch wrote: »

He was a member of the British Army that is active in volatile parts of the world.

So? By that logic you could justify anything. CIA blew up a school that was hiding a wanted man? Well they shouldn't have hid him then. A man was shot dead coming out of a Mosque? Well he shouldn't be supporting muslim fanatics. I fail to see how you can constantly argue against the killing of people in the middle east yet have no issue with terrorist attacks in reprisal. Can they not both be wrong? But I guess it's all the same to you eh? We're the bad guys and they are the good guys.

Cathal Cloch wrote: »

What? You think my entire life history should be available online? WFT are you on about? WhoTF would be interested?

I wasn't talking about your life history, just your boards one. I just think it strange that you would judge my knowledge solely on my post history.

space_man

Ford Juicy Smokehouse wrote: »

One of my best friends in London is a Pakistani Muslim. One of his (now ex) Facebook friends, a Pakistani-born guy who came to England to study, used to post statuses like 'fck this country and everyone in it', 'English women are all sluts who deserve to be raped' - maybe people like that? Who, you know, show indications that they have absolutely no respect for the society they live in and want to destroy it?

parts of England & London in particular have been destroyed by unfettered immigration.
people especially the PC bleeding heart variety prefer not to accept this.

fishy fishy

fishy fishy wrote: »

are you serious??? That is probably one of the most ridiculous posts on this thread. I do sometimes think you post things just for the mere reaction. Whatever gives you your kicks tho.

You think it's ridiculous to think people who have been given the opportunity to study in Britain shouldn't be removed, or at the very least investigated, for telling all and sundry that they hate Britain and can't wait for it to be blown up? I don't think I'm the ridiculous one here. Why don't you try learning some reading skills and doing some practice logic tests and try to understand what people are saying as opposed to what you THINK they're saying?

I haven't mentioned race at all. I would expect any Irish person ranting over Twitter about blowing people up and glorifying IRA bombings to receive the same treatment. But don't let reality get in the way of a good rant, eh?

space_man

space_man wrote: »

parts of England & London in particular have been destroyed by unfettered immigration.
people especially the PC bleeding heart variety prefer not to accept this.

I think it's as simple as, it's easy to be PC when none of these issues affect you in any way.

blaze1

space_man wrote: »

tbh i think British people have shown immense patience and tolerance.
if this crap was happening down the road from you, i wonder how forgiving you'ld be?

I'm English and have a lot of mates serving and family that have been in the services.

Points need to be made. Just stating a fact that the way the EDL were carrying on is not the way forward. This is just causing more harm and inciting more hatred.

Grand Moff Tarkin

If the lads hate the western way of life why don't they just fcuk off back to the caves in the middle east??

fishy fishy

Ford Juicy Smokehouse wrote: »

You think it's ridiculous to think people who have been given the opportunity to study in Britain shouldn't be removed, or at the very least investigated, for telling all and sundry that they hate Britain and can't wait for it to be blown up? I don't think I'm the ridiculous one here. Why don't you try learning some reading skills and doing some practice logic tests and try to understand what people are saying as opposed to what you THINK they're saying?

I haven't mentioned race at all. I would expect any Irish person ranting over Twitter about blowing people up and glorifying IRA bombings to receive the same treatment. But don't let reality get in the way of a good rant, eh?

I think your last post said this izzy

One of my best friends in London is a Pakistani Muslim. One of his (now ex) Facebook friends, a Pakistani-born guy who came to England to study, used to post statuses like 'fck this country and everyone in it', 'English women are all sluts who deserve to be raped' - maybe people like that? Who, you know, show indications that they have absolutely no respect for the society they live in and want to destroy it?

and now you are saying that they said

that they hate Britain and can't wait for it to be blown up?

which is it Izzy.

as far as your last bit of post

try to understand what people are saying as opposed to what you THINK they're saying?

I am actually going by what you DID post, not what was in your head - when you didn't like my answer - you changed the question.

I think I'm done with you Izzy - we are obviously two vastly different people (thank goodness) and we seem to disagree on everything. Good luck. but do remember what you post.

space_man

Ford Juicy Smokehouse wrote: »

I think it's as simple as, it's easy to be PC when none of these issues affect you in any way.

what's worrying the British security services more so than a coupe of nutters with a meat cleaver, is that a large minority of British citizens have had enough.
i can fully understand why.

Karl Stein

The logic expressed in several of your posts seems to indicate that these men were legitimately targeting an enemy combatant on the grounds he may be targeting civilians.

Really? I think you might be gathering that 'logic' by reading responses to my posts rather than the posts themselves.

If you accept that logic then it won't be a huge leap to legitimize the bombing of any part of downtown London on the grounds that it is the enemies financial center and you are reducing his capacity to wage war by destroying his economic base.

Too late. The west was already drawn into wars in the M.E. after 9/11. It's already cost us trillions and thousands of dead. Wasn't that what Al-Q wanted?

You are talking about Drones as if they are killing anything that moves, yet you fail to mention that the Pakistani military is actively using every weapon they have on the same area along it's border and killing as many.

They are killing way too many civilians and creating a conveyor belt of enemies. Some estimates have it at 2% valuable target for every other death. That's 49 dead for every 'worthwhile' kill. That is indiscriminate by any reasonable person's standards.

The study by Stanford Law School and New York University's School of Law calls for a re-evaluation of the practice, saying the number of "high-level" targets killed as a percentage of total casualties is extremely low -- about 2%.

http://edition.cnn.com/2012/09/25/world/asia/pakistan-us-drone-strikes

The only reason I can see that people are dying as a result of US and UK forces is because the Islamic world is a rather unpleasant place when it comes to reason and the respect of others.

Oh dear.

The west has played a major part in propping up brutal dictators, overthrowing democracies, and ignoring nasty regimes there.

Might have something to do with the flying of two planes into two towers.

Because history started on that day? I get ya.

space_man

blaze1 wrote: »

I'm English and have a lot of mates serving and family that have been in the services.

Points need to be made. Just stating a fact that the way the EDL were carrying on is not the way forward. This is just causing more harm and inciting more hatred.

if you're really interested in decreasing hatred & tension, then the UK Govt. needs to grasp the nettle, instead of burying its' head in the sand.

Celly Smunt

space_man wrote: »

if you're really interested in decreasing hatred & tension, then the UK Govt. needs to grasp the nettle, instead of burying its' head in the sand.

By doing what?,deporting every immigrant?,moving them to ghettos?,clearing out the immigrant heavy areas?,shooting them?,denying them their right to religion?

The only way they can stem immigration is to restrict immigration,something they have always failed to do and will continue to fail at.

space_man

pmcmahon wrote: »

By doing what?,deporting every immigrant?,moving them to ghettos?,clearing out the immigrant heavy areas?,shooting them?,denying them their right to religion?

The only way they can stem immigration is to restrict immigration,something they have always failed to do and will continue to fail at.

most certainly there are lessons here for this country before it's too late.
i like the idea of deportations. why not?

Blisterman

space_man wrote: »

if you're really interested in decreasing hatred & tension, then the UK Govt. needs to grasp the nettle, instead of burying its' head in the sand.

Blocking out immigrants isn't going to reduce the amount of relgious extremism in the world. In fact it would probably end up increasing it. The only difference being that it will be take place in other countries.

That to me seems the very definition of burying your head in the sand.

enda1

Grand Moff Tarkin wrote: »

If the lads hate the western way of life why don't they just fcuk off back to the caves in the middle east??

They're of Nigerian origin. It's not a middle east country. Not sure how many caves it has.

mattjack

Grand Moff Tarkin wrote: »

If the lads hate the western way of life why don't they just fcuk off back to the caves in the middle east??

One of your finer comments , suggesting that people in the Middle East live in caves.

Grand Moff Tarkin

enda1 wrote: »

They're of Nigerian origin. It's not a middle east country. Not sure how many caves it has.

Point still stands. If they are not happy with how things are done in this part of the world head back to where they came from. :rolleyes:

Spurtacus

Many neigbourhoods in England have had to listen to radical extremist Muslim teachings for a long time with the state unable or unwilling to step in.
Place must be like a tinderbox at present & I would worry about organised retribution.
Time for leaders to step up in all communities.

Grand Moff Tarkin

mattjack wrote: »

One of your finer comments , suggesting that people in the Middle East live in caves.

Sure the Irish are a nation of spud munchers. :rolleyes:

space_man

Blisterman wrote: »

Blocking out immigrants isn't going to reduce the amount of relgious extremism in the world. In fact it would probably end up increasing it. The only difference being that it will be take place in other countries.

That to me seems the very definition of burying your head in the sand.

so your answer is to try and assimilate every aspiring immigrant from these 3rd world countries?
and you think that will make for a happy society?

yes and we'll rename it La La Land.:D

FTA69

space_man wrote: »

parts of England & London in particular have been destroyed by unfettered immigration.

Where in London? I'm sitting in a predominantly Muslim area right now and don't see any impending apocalypse.

who the fug

Fail to see how the actions of two nutjobs is the fault of immigrants

This tweet from Pamela Nash a Labour MP sums up my views

Pamela Nash MP ‏@pamela_nash 14h
Disgusted by both anti Armed Forces & anti Islam comments tonight. It seems two men intended to stir up hatred today; don't let them win.

Dyr

Spurtacus wrote: »

Many neigbourhoods in England have had to listen to radical extremist Muslim teachings for a long time with the state unable or unwilling to step in.
Place must be like a tinderbox at present & I would worry about organised retribution.

I'm sure many people would be as tolerant as they are of mulslamic mentalism if that happened.

enda1

Grand Moff Tarkin wrote: »

Point still stands. If they are not happy with how things are done in this part of the world head back to where they came from. :rolleyes:

No need for rollyeyes :rolleyes:

These men are UK citizens. They have every right to be unhappy with how the UK is run and to want and strive for an Islamic state. They just don't have the right to do that via means outside current law.

who the fug

Grand Moff Tarkin wrote: »

Point still stands. If they are not happy with how things are done in this part of the world head back to where they came from. :rolleyes:

South London

mattjack

Grand Moff Tarkin wrote: »

Sure the Irish are a nation of spud munchers. :rolleyes:

Brilliant , you're wit knows no boundary this morning .

NinjaK

The questions needs to be asked though, if the Brits were not invading Muslim countries left, right and centre would this have happened?

who the fug

NinjaK wrote: »

The questions needs to be asked though, if the Brits were not invading Muslim countries left, right and centre would this have happened?

A choice of being

Dammed by the world for standing by and Dammed for doing something

Grand Moff Tarkin

mattjack wrote: »

Brilliant , you're wit knows no boundary this morning .

Just as well I am using wit to get a point across which some people have no interest in even trying to see.

Just to put it in terms you might have a better hope of understanding. If the Muslim lads who are shouting death to the west and go around chopping up folks because of the job they do are not happy they should really think of heading back to what ever country they arrived from first day. I hope I have been able to get my point across to you in words you can understand.:rolleyes:

Celly Smunt

NinjaK wrote: »

The questions needs to be asked though, if the Brits were not invading Muslim countries left, right and centre would this have happened?

if Hitler won the war would we be speaking German?

Nobody knows.

space_man

who the fug wrote: »

Fail to see how the actions of two nutjobs is the fault of immigrants

This tweet from Pamela Nash a Labour MP sums up my views

Pamela Nash MP ‏@pamela_nash 14h
Disgusted by both anti Armed Forces & anti Islam comments tonight. It seems two men intended to stir up hatred today; don't let them win.

fortunately that type of patronisng "there, there, it'll be ok" type of BS doesn' cut it anymore.
doubtless she's got on eye on the recent gains of UKIP. it's her Govt's failed policies that have helped cause the problem. consequences they're too gutless to face up to.

Grand Moff Tarkin

enda1 wrote: »

No need for rollyeyes :rolleyes:

These men are UK citizens. They have every right to be unhappy with how the UK is run and to want and strive for an Islamic state. They just don't have the right to do that via means outside current law.

The open door policy of Labour really worked out for the best.

getz

FTA69 wrote: »

Where in London? I'm sitting in a predominantly Muslim area right now and don't see any impending apocalypse.

there is not a problem with people of the muslim religion in the UK,in fact they are more than a little upset by the way these scum are twisting islamic teachings.

Blisterman

space_man wrote: »

so your answer is to try and assimilate every aspiring immigrant from these 3rd world countries?
and you think that will make for a happy society?

yes and we'll rename it La La Land.:D

That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm addressing the considerable number of people who seem to think that the cause of this extremist violence is immigration, rather than religious fanaticism or tribalism.

The only way the latter two can be defeated is through the creation worldwide of an air of tolerance and respect rather than through further division and mistrust.

space_man

Blisterman wrote: »

The only way the latter two can be defeated is through the creation worldwide of an air of tolerance and respect rather than through further division and mistrust.

crikey it must be lovely living in La La Land?

Grand Moff Tarkin

Blisterman wrote: »

That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm addressing the considerable number of people who seem to think that the cause of this extremist violence is immigration, rather than religious fanaticism or tribalism.

The only way the latter two can be defeated is through the creation worldwide of an air of tolerance and respect rather than through further division and mistrust.

Not going to happen all the sons of Allah understand is hate and violence.

mod:
banned.

Blisterman

NinjaK wrote: »

The questions needs to be asked though, if the Brits were not invading Muslim countries left, right and centre would this have happened?

This is the root cause of this and so many other problems. Looking at the world through such divisions as "the brits", "the muslims" etc, as if everyone who belongs to these groups are the same, and thus are equally as valid a target.

Blisterman

space_man wrote: »

crikey it must be lovely living in La La Land?

Yeah, cause solving problems though division and violence has worked so well throughout history?

space_man

Grand Moff Tarkin wrote: »

The open door policy of Labour really worked out for the best.

bit like our own version i suppose.

all's well in La La Land ..........

fishy fishy

Grand Moff Tarkin wrote: »

Point still stands. If they are not happy with how things are done in this part of the world head back to where they came from. :rolleyes:

That sentence can be applied to every country in the world

Fratton Fred

NinjaK wrote: »

The questions needs to be asked though, if the Brits were not invading Muslim countries left, right and centre would this have happened?

Maybe not this attack, but another sort of attack elsewhere.

if these people want to protect Muslims, where we're they when Britain was defending Muslims in Bosnia?

Why aren't they going to Afghanistan to help prevent the Taliban from poisoning school girls or shooting teachers?

Why aren't they attacking Irish soldiers in the Curragh?

Karl Stein

SB2013 wrote: »

And if a hundred people were shot then it would have the same effect.

Too many civilians are being killed and traumatised. We call that terrorism here.

The method, wether it be bomb, gun or drone is irrelevent,

Unlike guns and agents on the ground bombs don't care about who's nearby and tend not to change their minds once they've been launched.

it's the purpose

There are many purposes for war. What do you think the purposes are. Kill baddies?

and result of it's use

Destruction, death, fear, anger, revenge.

Let's remember that the original comment that I posted which you responded to was that there was no justification for this murder. It was you who disagreed

You made an assertion you called it an unjustifiable murder. I did not explicitly disagree. I responded with this:

Cathal Cloch wrote: »

By whose rules/standards? Yours? Who gives a shit about your rules/standards? We've already had a person who was actually stationed in Afghanistan saying this:

Originally Posted by Manic Moran
If he was in the military, he wasn't an innocent lad, though. I don't know why people have this bizarre idea these days that geographic borders should provide immunity to the hazards of warfare.

Now MM is saying he wasn't 'an innocent lad' which calls into question your 'unjustifiable murder' assumption and not my questioning of your arrogance around the issue.

So? By that logic you could justify anything. CIA blew up a school that was hiding a wanted man? Well they shouldn't have hid him then. A man was shot dead coming out of a Mosque? Well he shouldn't be supporting muslim fanatics.

You have some knack for trying to twist logic. I've been arguing about the blowback and civilian killings caused by drone strikes. If this guy was sitting in a pub and they blew it up then imo the deaths of the civilians around him would be unjustifiable.

I fail to see how you can constantly argue against the killing of people in the middle east yet have no issue with terrorist attacks in reprisal.

Good old Mr Strawman. Engage my points or don't bother quoting them.

Can they not both be wrong?

Absolutely they can - a point lost on many here when it comes to 'our side'.

But I guess it's all the same to you eh? We're the bad guys and they are the good guys.

Now we have Mrs Straw-woman. Maybe she'll marry Mr. Strawman and they'll have lots of little straw-babies so you'll have a plentiful sup.... you're breeding them aren't you?

I just think it strange that you would judge my knowledge solely on my post history.

I would have thought it rather normal to build up a picture of someone's levels of knowledge and general views on issues by their post history.

mattjack

Grand Moff Tarkin wrote: »

Just as well I am using wit to get a point across which some people have no interest in even trying to see.

Just to put it in terms you might have a better hope of understanding. If the Muslim lads who are shouting death to the west and go around chopping up folks because of the job they do are not happy they should really think of heading back to what ever country they arrived from first day. I hope I have been able to get my point across to you in words you can understand.:rolleyes:

You're suggesting I don't understand ...... this from the person who suggests people from the Middle East live in caves and even paying the slightest bit of attention to the media this morning would inform you the two men were of Nigerian background.

Keep rolling your eyes , chump ,they're the most active thing you got going in your head this morning.

space_man

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Maybe not this attack, but another sort of attack elsewhere.

if these people want to protect Muslims, where we're they when Britain was defending Muslims in Bosnia?

Why aren't they going to Afghanistan to help prevent the Taliban from poisoning school girls or shooting teachers?

Why aren't they attacking Irish soldiers in the Curragh?

the overwhelming majority of Muslim women & children , who this animal professes to care so much about, are being killed by his fellow-muslims, not by the UK/US armed forces.

Karl Stein

space_man wrote: »

the overwhelming majority of Muslim women & children , who this animal professes to care so much about, are being killed by his fellow-muslims, not by the UK/US armed forces.

It's a poor argument you're making.

The US/UK/west should have put a stop to the killing when they went in but it was a half-arsed job from the start and Iraq2 drew energy and resources away.

The occupiers have a moral (and I think formal responsibility under the Geneva conventions, not sure) to protect civilians under their auspices.

kling

space_man wrote: »

parts of England & London in particular have been destroyed by unfettered immigration.
people especially the PC bleeding heart variety prefer not to accept this.

Total bollix.

Next!

space_man

Cathal Cloch wrote: »

It's a poor argument you're making.

The US/UK/west should have put a stop to the killing when they went in but it was a half-arsed job from the start and Iraq2 drew energy and resources away.

The occupiers have a moral (and I think formal responsibility under the Geneva conventions, not sure) to protect civilians under their auspices.

i wasn't necessarily referring to Afghanistan (which is a pretty big area to police btw) but also to Iran, Pakistan, Nigeria, Egypt, Syria, Yemen amongst others. Uk armed forces have no presence in these places that i know of:rolleyes:

Gatling

UK is a multicultural success story

Fratton Fred

Cathal Cloch wrote: »

It's a poor argument you're making.

The US/UK/west should have put a stop to the killing when they went in but it was a half-arsed job from the start and Iraq2 drew energy and resources away.

The occupiers have a moral (and I think formal responsibility under the Geneva conventions, not sure) to protect civilians under their auspices.

Forget Iraq2 for a minute, these guys were harping on about Afghanistan.

ISAF was formed under UN mandate at the request of the Afghan government. The whole intention is to bring about stability and security to the country.

The Taliban are intent on creating their own version of an Islamic theocracy and are using intimidation and threat to the civilian population to help bring this about.

ISAF are protecting schools from attack because the Taliban don't believe girls should be educated. They are defusing IEDs in civilian areas that the Taliban are planting to intimidate civilians. ISAF are protecting civilians from the Taliban who, incidentally, in the main non Afghanis.