Attack outside UK Houses Of Parliament — No speculation — Read 1st post

donkeykong5

Boom_Bap wrote: »

MOD NOD
This thread haspretty much stopped discussing the topic and has moved on to a discussion of religion, immigration and every other terror incident in history.

Back onto the topic of the incident in London please.

Many facebook posters have a union jack on their profiles now. As a solidarity symbol and to express their horror and disgust at the innocent people murdered by the imbecile last week.

Billy86

Not sure what the symbolism of it being all women was, but just saw this.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/womens-march-organisers-show-solidarity-with-terror-victims-with-westminster-bridge-vigil-a3499591.html

FrancieBrady

donkeykong5 wrote: »

Many facebook posters have a union jack on their profiles now. As a solidarity symbol and to express their horror and disgust at the innocent people murdered by the imbecile last week.

That's the problem sorted then. Facebook cured cancer too didn't it?

jmayo

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

fcuk Leinster House

Dublin shopping centres/ areas should have armed plain clothes gardai wandering around them

Typical Dublin centric view of Ireland.
All the other shopping centres and areas round the country can go to hell ehhhh.

Billy86 wrote: »

Not sure what the symbolism of it being all women was, but just saw this.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/womens-march-organisers-show-solidarity-with-terror-victims-with-westminster-bridge-vigil-a3499591.html

Ehh maybe it was a bit like one of those Halawa protests where the girls get to protest by themselves.

Besides most of the females in the picture are dressed as reasonably devout muslims so no hand holding with non related males.

Also did anyone notice how many of the protestors are wearing glasses ?

222233

[QUOTE=jmayo;103041772

Besides most of the females in the picture are dressed as reasonably devout muslims so no hand holding with non related males.

Also did anyone notice how many of the protestors are wearing glasses ?[/QUOTE]

What exactly are they protesting for?

donkeykong5

222233 wrote: »

[QUOTE=jmayo;103041772

Besides most of the females in the picture are dressed as reasonably devout muslims so no hand holding with non related males.

Also did anyone notice how many of the protestors are wearing glasses ?

What exactly are they protesting for?[/quote]
Free glasses at Specsavers.

Brilliant article in The Times [Paywall] The pandering to Islam by the left is one of the great ironies of our time.

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/stand-up-for-our-right-to-criticise-islam-k707stmnj

It is wrong to describe this as Islamic terrorism. It is Islamist terrorism. It is a perversion of a great faith.” This is what the prime minister said last week in parliament. While I completely accept that the sins of extremists should never be visited on the vast majority of moderate believers, I am increasingly uneasy about how we handle the connection between religion and extremism. The ideology to which Khalid Masood was converted in prison may indeed be a perversion of Islam, but it is a version of it. We should not shy away from saying so.

After Nice, Maajid Nawaz of the Quilliam Foundation wrote that saying such terrorism has nothing to do with Islam (as some do) is as dangerous as stating that it has everything to do with Islam. The terrorists in London, Paris, Brussels, Nice, Munich, Berlin, Würzburg, Ansbach, Orlando, San Bernardino, Sydney, Bali, New York, Bombay and many other places have been white, black and brown, rich, poor and middle class, male and female, gay and straight, immigrant and native, young and (now) older. The one thing they have in common is that they had been radicalised by religious preachers claiming to interpret the Koran.


Moreover, while a few sick individuals find within Islam justification for murder and terror, a far larger number find justification for misogyny and intolerance. We must be allowed to say this without being thought to criticise Muslims as people.

Islamist terrorism has become more frequent, but criticism of the faith of Islam, and of religion in general, seems to be becoming less acceptable, as if it were equivalent to racism or blasphemy. The charge of Islamophobia is too quickly levelled. Friday’s press release from Malia Bouattia, president of the National Union of Students, is a case in point. It failed to mention by name the murdered policeman Keith Palmer, and highlighted how Muslims “will be especially fearful of racism”. Race and religion are very different things.
I admire many religious people. I am prepared to accept that being religious can make some individuals better people, though, as a humanist, I also think it is possible and actually preferable to be moral without having faith. I am even open to the possibility that the best defence against extremism is a gentler version of religion rather than none at all — though I need to be convinced. But I think that, rather than there being good religion and bad religion, there is a spectrum of religious belief from virtuous, individualist morality at one end to collectivist, politicised violent terror at the other.

At one end are people who are inspired by faith to think only of how to help those in need. At the other are people who kill policemen and tourists, throw homosexuals off buildings, punish apostasy with death, carry out female genital mutilation and throw acid in the face of women who have stood up against the male code (there were 431 acid attacks in Britain last year).
In between, though, are positions that also contain dangers, albeit more subtle ones. There are people who would not commit violence themselves, but think women should be the chattels of men, wearing of veils is mandatory and that Sharia should reign. Then there are people (and here I include those in other Abrahamic faiths) who think homosexuality is sinful, contraception is wrong, evolution could not have happened and slaughtering animals by cutting their throats is more moral than stunning them. I do not condemn such beliefs as evil, but nor do I respect them.

On LBC radio last week the journalist James O’Brien said of those, like Masood, who have made the journey from faith to extremism: “Don’t we have to start mocking the early stages of that journey? People who believe that chopping off a child’s foreskin is going to make it easier for them to get into heaven. People who believe that eating fish on Fridays is somehow going to please their god.”
In 1979, some Christians took offence at Monty Python’s Life of Brian, a witty if mordant satire on the phenomenon of cults (and Romans). The Christians were angry but the Pythons did not go into hiding.Two years ago, in the wake of the murder of his fellow satirists at Charlie Hebdo, the late Australian cartoonist Bill Leak went further than simply saying “Je suis Charlie” and drew cartoons of the Prophet. As a result he was forced to sell his house and move to a secret location. That does not feel like progress to me.

In 2004, after the media was filled with discussion of how the Boxing Day tsunami was an “act of God”, I said to a friend, in all seriousness: the tsunami was not an act of God, but 9/11 was. I was consciously echoing Voltaire’s mockery of the argument that the destruction of Lisbon in an earthquake must be a punishment for the sins of its inhabitants. Would I dare say the same today about the events of last week, or would I pause now to consider how it would get me into trouble?

Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali wrote at the weekend of the “creeping Islamisation of communities” and called for an Islamic reformation to respect freedom of religion, abjure legal punishment for blasphemy or apostasy and agree that women should be free and equal in law. Yet, despite two decades of partly religion-inspired violence, those who call for an Islamic reformation, such as Mr Nawaz, or the ex-Muslim campaigners Sarah Haider, Taslima Nasreen and Ayaan Hirsi Ali, are increasingly vilified by many on the left.

Three days before the Westminster attack, the BBC’s Asian Network quite rightly apologised for asking “what is the right punishment for blasphemy?” shortly after an outspoken atheist had been hacked to death in Coimbatore, India, for expressing his views. There have been 48 murders of atheists in Bangladesh in recent years. Yet it is now more acceptable to attack “militant atheists” than militant theists. Blasphemy is back.


We can and must make an offer to the fundamentalist Muslims: abandon your political ambitions and become a religion as this has come to be understood elsewhere in an increasingly diverse and tolerant world — a private moral code, a way of life, a philosophy — and you will find the rest of us to be friends. But threaten the hard-won political, intellectual and physical freedoms now accorded to every man and woman, yes even and especially women, in our essentially secular society and you will be resisted and, pray god, defeated.

donkeykong5

FrancieBrady wrote: »

donkeykong5 wrote: »

Many facebook posters have a union jack on their profiles now. As a solidarity symbol and to express their horror and disgust at the innocent people murdered by the imbecile last week.

That's the problem sorted then. Facebook cured cancer too didn't it?

I wrote it up as the moderator wanted to steer posters back to the innocent people murdered in london. Nothing to do with a cure for cancer. Just a gesture fir those of us who still can't get over the murders last week. Ok!

Will I Am Not

Weird that both those videos posted by Depp have disappeared from YouTube?

Getting a message saying the YouTube account has been terminated on one of them.

CoolHandBandit

Billy86 wrote: »

Not sure what the symbolism of it being all women was, but just saw this.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/womens-march-organisers-show-solidarity-with-terror-victims-with-westminster-bridge-vigil-a3499591.html

Not exactly Miss World is it :eek:

dublinman1990

I got an update from the ITV Evening News about Kalhid Masood.

Scotland Yard had said tonight that there was was 'no evidence' to say that he was radicalized in prison by IS, Al Qaeda or by Jihads in the lead up to the attack last Wednesday. The prison service is apparently exonerated from this action because it was speculation but questions are being asked about why he was not properly rehabilitated which would have prevented him becoming a terrorist in lead up to the attack.

His mother, Janet Ajao, had released a statement tonight on the ITV News Website to give her response to the attack.

I am so deeply shocked, saddened and numbed by the actions my son has taken that have killed and injured innocent people in Westminster. Since discovering that it was my son that was responsible I have shed many tears for the people caught up in this horrendous incident. I wish to make it absolutely clear, so there can be no doubt, I do not condone his actions nor support the beliefs he held that led to him committing this atrocity.

I wish to thank my friends, family and community from the bottom of my heart for the love and support given to us.

– JANET AJAO

http://www.itv.com/news/2017-03-27/westminster-attack-khalid-masoods-mother-deeply-saddened-by-his-actions/

http://www.itv.com/news/2017-03-27/khalid-masood-no-evidence-westminster-attack-was-associated-with-islamic-state-or-al-qaeda-say-police/

FrancieBrady

donkeykong5 wrote: »

I wrote it up as the moderator wanted to steer posters back to the innocent people murdered in london. Nothing to do with a cure for cancer. Just a gesture fir those of us who still can't get over the murders last week. Ok!

OK, but that FB thing is still cringe.

I understand now you were being sincere but you still had a humorous swipe at what looks like a sincere demonstration by Muslim women, who actually did something a bit more energetic than changing their FB profile pics.

222233

So she basically has confirmed he was an islamic extremist?

donkeykong5

FrancieBrady wrote: »

donkeykong5 wrote: »

I wrote it up as the moderator wanted to steer posters back to the innocent people murdered in london. Nothing to do with a cure for cancer. Just a gesture fir those of us who still can't get over the murders last week. Ok!

OK, but that FB thing is still cringe.

I understand now you were being sincere but you still had a humorous swipe at what looks like a sincere demonstration by Muslim women, who actually did something a bit more energetic than changing their FB profile pics.

Ah calm down. When the poster mentioned that so many were wearing glasses. I thought it was kinda funny. Nice to smile after all the horror last week.

FrancieBrady

donkeykong5 wrote: »

Ah calm down. When the poster mentioned that so many were wearing glasses. I thought it was kinda funny. Nice to smile after all the horror last week.

Yes, it is. And I too was having a smile at the idea that changing a profile pic was going to change something. I was NOT belittling the suffering.

donkeykong5

222233 wrote: »

So she basically has confirmed he was an islamic extremist?

Why doesn't she use the name she gave him when he was born ?

donkeykong5

FrancieBrady wrote: »

donkeykong5 wrote: »

Ah calm down. When the poster mentioned that so many were wearing glasses. I thought it was kinda funny. Nice to smile after all the horror last week.

Yes, it is. And I too was having a smile at the idea that changing a profile pic was going to change something. I was NOT belittling the suffering.

OK.

ScumLord

222233 wrote: »

So she basically has confirmed he was an islamic extremist?

No, she said she was shocked and saddened by what he did and doesn't share his beliefs. I don't think she or anyone else really thinks she needs to confirm or deny anything about his political stance.

donkeykong5 wrote: »

Why doesn't she use the name she gave him when he was born ?

Who says she isn't. She doesn't mention his name once, only the writers of the article do.

dublinman1990

I just want to send my condolences about the people who died in the attack. It was very shocking to see the aftermath of it all while watching the news that day. Whether this attack was motivated by islamic extremism or not; it still does not give any real facts of why it had to be done to hurt innocent people who were going about their business on a normal given day.

The families of the american victims did show forgiveness to the attacker for what happened to their loved ones last Wednesday. Whether other families will give him forgiveness, including PC Palmer's Family, is another story to tell because it happened very suddenly & without warning for any of them going about their jobs. I do not condone what Masood did to them with his rented car. For christ sake; what an asshole for carrying out that horror to them and to their families. It feels like he has no shame for doing things like that to them.

Life does go on as normal for other people. But for the victim's families; it will a different experience for them by encountering a huge personal loss that will be too big for them to recover. I do hope that they will find peace some day.

222233

ScumLord wrote: »

No, she said she was shocked and saddened by what he did and doesn't share his beliefs. I don't think she or anyone else really thinks she needs to confirm or deny anything about his political stance.

I do not condone his actions nor support the beliefs he held that led to him committing this atrocity.

This is what I was referring to, she mentioned his beliefs that "led" him to committing the attack, therefore suggesting it was indeed radical beliefs and perhaps not these "criminal" and "justice" reasons people have been discussing.

Billy86

CoolHandBandit wrote: »

Not exactly Miss World is it :eek:

Widdershins

dublinman1990 wrote: »

I got an update from the ITV Evening News about Kalhid Masood.

Scotland Yard had said tonight that there was was 'no evidence' to say that he was radicalized in prison by IS, Al Qaeda or by Jihads in the lead up to the attack last Wednesday. The prison service is apparently exonerated from this action because it was speculation but questions are being asked about why he was not properly rehabilitated which would have prevented him becoming a terrorist in lead up to the attack.

His mother, Janet Ajao, had released a statement tonight on the ITV News Website to give her response to the attack.



http://www.itv.com/news/2017-03-27/westminster-attack-khalid-masoods-mother-deeply-saddened-by-his-actions/

http://www.itv.com/news/2017-03-27/khalid-masood-no-evidence-westminster-attack-was-associated-with-islamic-state-or-al-qaeda-say-police/

I pity her. I have to wonder though. Some might consider their son making their granddaughter convert to Islam, and wear a burqa, a glaringly obvious sign of something serious brewing. But then hindsight is always 20/20. Maybe she did not have much influence over his decisions.

Widdershins

Widdershins wrote: »

I pity her. I have to wonder though. Some might consider their son making their granddaughter convert to Islam, and wear a burqa, a glaringly obvious sign of something serious brewing. But then hindsight is always 20/20. Maybe she did not have much influence over his decisions.

As a female opposing his religious belief? TBH though, if he did indeed find God, then I doubt anyone could have swayed him except perhaps his Imam.

Widdershins

Deleted User wrote: »

As a female opposing his religious belief? TBH though, if he did indeed find God, then I doubt anyone could have swayed him except perhaps his Imam.

Well, that's a point

FrancieBrady

222233 wrote: »

This is what I was referring to, she mentioned his beliefs that "led" him to committing the attack, therefore suggesting it was indeed radical beliefs and perhaps not these "criminal" and "justice" reasons people have been discussing.

She was probably referencing his 'belief' that what he did was the thing to do.

The police haven't found 'why' he did it.
You would think if he was doing it for a specific cause he would have left something clear behind.

Widdershins

FrancieBrady wrote: »

She was probably referencing his 'belief' that what he did was the thing to do.

The police haven't found 'why' he did it.
You would think if he was doing it for a specific cause he would have left something clear behind.

Like a last will and testament leaving his earthly belongings to Isil.

Or perhaps a terror cell, haven't they unearthed one in connection to him?

222233

FrancieBrady wrote: »

She was probably referencing his 'belief' that what he did was the thing to do.

The police haven't found 'why' he did it.
You would think if he was doing it for a specific cause he would have left something clear behind.

Maybe. Maybe not.

I have had a slightly off topic brain wave. This man was again driving a rental car, as were many of the other terror attackers. Perhaps rental car companies should be given more room to avoid renting to people in certain circumstances...

Timberrrrrrrr

Widdershins wrote: »

Like a last will and testament leaving his earthly belongings to Isil.

Or perhaps a terror cell, haven't they unearthed one in connection to him?

Police saying no evidence of connection to ISIL


http://news.sky.com/story/no-evidence-khalid-masood-had-links-to-islamic-state-say-police-10815890

donkeykong5

222233 wrote: »

FrancieBrady wrote: »

She was probably referencing his 'belief' that what he did was the thing to do.

The police haven't found 'why' he did it.
You would think if he was doing it for a specific cause he would have left something clear behind.

Maybe. Maybe not.

I have had a slightly off topic brain wave. This man was again driving a rental car, as were many of the other terror attackers. Perhaps rental car companies should be given more room to avoid renting to people in certain circumstances...

Pc brigade alert here.........

FrancieBrady

Widdershins wrote: »

Like a last will and testament leaving his earthly belongings to Isil.

Or perhaps a terror cell, haven't they unearthed one in connection to him?

Not a will, but a more overt sign of 'why' like chatting to like minds etc.
A terror cell? Missed that, link?

222233 wrote: »

Maybe. Maybe not.

I have had a slightly off topic brain wave. This man was again driving a rental car, as were many of the other terror attackers. Perhaps rental car companies should be given more room to avoid renting to people in certain circumstances...

How? Don't hire cars to people who say they want to do a suicide run?
Not sure what you mean.