London Bridge Incident - mod warning in OP

Blind Eagle

Rebranding wrote: »

Haha so funni

How about muslims stop slaughtering peope in theaters and restaurants?

How about muslims stop massacring people with trucks?

Do you know what happened to the young girl killed in the Stockholm attack? She was literally torn in half.

You could quite as easily be some far left progressive type with sort of post:

How about white-men stop slaughtering people in theatres and restaurants?

How about white men stop massacring people at Church?

Do you know what happened to that young man in the Christchurch attack? He was shot at point blank range.


It's a silly debating technique.

Blind Eagle

Deleted User wrote: »

A couple of facts:

• Islamic jihad can be traced back to the 1920s. There were movements then, that mirror what we now see.
• UK didn't invade Nigeria. How do you explain Boko Haram and a whole spectrum of Islamist organizations throughout Africa?
• US invaded Vietnam. Where are the Vietnamese terrorists?
• US invaded Korea. Where are the Korean terrorists?

How do you explain the formation of terrorist organizations such as:

• Turkistan Islamic Party
• Al-Shabaab in East Africa

The point is this: by focussing on Iraq/ISIS, you miss the wider context and history of Islamic fascism, which is at least a century old, and which has tentacles throughout most continents in the world. Furthermore, military invasion does not successfully equate to "that's what produces terrorism".

You are indeed correct. However, one cannot ignore the problems that Western intervention in the ME has caused stretching all the way back to WW1.

We've exasperated an already big problem. This doesn't excuse such attacks obviously.

Will I Am Not

Blind Eagle wrote: »

You are indeed correct. However, one cannot ignore the problems that Western intervention in the ME has caused stretching all the way back to WW1.

We've exasperated an already big problem. This doesn't excuse such attacks obviously.

Nah.

Blind Eagle

Will I Am Not wrote: »

Nah.

Well not Ireland. I mean UK, America, France etc.

Nigel Farage responds to the incident:

https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1200715343108431873

Will I Am Not

Blind Eagle wrote: »

Well not Ireland. I mean UK, America, France etc.

Yeah, not we.

Blind Eagle

Will I Am Not wrote: »

Yeah, not we.

Ireland is part of the West, which is the term I used initially. Be pedantic if you want.

joe40

Blind Eagle wrote: »

You are indeed correct. However, one cannot ignore the problems that Western intervention in the ME has caused stretching all the way back to WW1.

We've exasperated an already big problem. This doesn't excuse such attacks obviously.

The Americans were quite happy to arm and help Islamic groups in Afghanistan in the 80s to fight the Russians.

All this anti Muslim hard man rhetoric, ignored the fact that the people suffering the most are in fact other Muslims.
Tearing up our rule of law and legal system willl solve nothing.

Boggles

Deleted User wrote: »

A couple of facts:

• Islamic jihad can be traced back to the 1920s. There were movements then, that mirror what we now see.
• UK didn't invade Nigeria. How do you explain Boko Haram and a whole spectrum of Islamist organizations throughout Africa?
• US invaded Vietnam. Where are the Vietnamese terrorists?
• US invaded Korea. Where are the Korean terrorists?

How do you explain the formation of terrorist organizations such as:

• Turkistan Islamic Party
• Al-Shabaab in East Africa

The point is this: by focussing on Iraq/ISIS, you miss the wider context and history of Islamic fascism, which is at least a century old, and which has tentacles throughout most continents in the world. Furthermore, military invasion does not successfully equate to "that's what produces terrorism".

You specifically mentioned ISIS.

Will I Am Not

Blind Eagle wrote: »

Ireland is part of the West, which is the term I used initially. Be pedantic if you want.

It’s a bugbear. Ireland may be part of the West but it’s ridiculous to say ‘we’ are out warmongering in the ME.

Nermal

Deleted User wrote: »

First victim announced
"My son, Jack, who was killed in this attack, would not wish his death to be used as the pretext for more draconian sentences or for detaining people unnecessarily."

Even in death, he is woke.

Heckler

Londoners are always portrayed as unfriendly, never make eye contact on the tube etc..Outstanding work from the public and the police. Knife disarmed, potential bomb vest. Shot dead. Thats a great result.

Heckler

Heckler wrote: »

Londoners are always portrayed as unfriendly, never make eye contact on the tube etc..Outstanding work from the public and the police. Knife disarmed, potential bomb vest. Shot dead. Thats a great result.

Two civilian deaths described as part of an overall "great result" isn't perhaps the most appropriate language, I'd say.

Blind Eagle

Will I Am Not wrote: »

It’s a bugbear. Ireland may be part of the West but it’s ridiculous to say ‘we’ are out warmongering in the ME.

Ok fair enough.

Spanish Eyes

Heckler wrote: »

Londoners are always portrayed as unfriendly, never make eye contact on the tube etc..Outstanding work from the public and the police. Knife disarmed, potential bomb vest. Shot dead. Thats a great result.

Agreed. Although I suppose there will be a backlash because one or more, (not sure) of the civilians who took him on were ex cons and one was convicted of murder. I think the guy who had the knife in his hand in the clip was an off duty Transport Police Officer.

In all my trips to London which is an amazing city, I have never found any determined unfriendliness at all. Must be my demeanour or something saintly like that!

They are living in a humungous city that has a high crime rate and is subject to terrorism. They need a break. First it was the IRA, now this.

It will not break Londoners though. Good on them.

NewbridgeIR

Nermal wrote: »

Even in death, he is woke.

It is a most timid, almost pathetic tribute; have to allow for the fact that he is in shock. But it reads like a resigned acceptance.

Slowyourrole

Deleted User wrote: »

Background checks; access to long-term social media profiles etc.

If they fail to provide these accounts/details, their request to enter the country is denied.

This puts the onus on them, rather than us.

That's fine for normal immigration but the issue with refugees is they often don't have that stuff and it's often unreasonable to expect them to when you consider the situations they come from.

Deleted User wrote: »

ISIS have already come out and said that foreign policy has next to nothing to do with why they are waging war on the West. They said that even if all intervention stopped, they would still be doing what they're doing.

In their words, it's because we have not "embraced Islam".

So, dare I say, let's trust ISIS' word on that.

ISIS needs soldiers. Soldiers are regular people who have been radicalised. They are vulnerable to this radicalisation for many different reasons. Not indiscriminately murdering their families and countrymen would be one less of those reasons.

walshb wrote: »

In a nutshell, humans have time and time again proved that integration and diversity and assimilation cause problems. Even with your own “people” there are problems; throwing in other peoples and expecting any semblance of harmony is just foolish idealism..

Humans have time and again proven that they can overcome those problems when obstacles are removed.

NewbridgeIR wrote: »

It is a most timid, almost pathetic tribute; have to allow for the fact that he is in shock. But it reads like a resigned acceptance.

I'm sure he's sorry he doesn't grieve they way you think he should.

The Turk

The Turk wrote: »

Hey guys. A thought occurred to me today, how come countries like Poland and Hungary never seem to have Islamic terror attacks?

What are they doing that Sweden, Germany, Britain, France etc aren't?

Benefits systems from those 4 countries are some of highest in Europe.

When 1 million migrants - 80% of whom were economic migrants - flooded into Europe, the vast majority went to Germany, Sweden, and France. It's not about "safety", otherwise they would have stayed in Turkey, Greece, Italy or Spain.

Instead, it's about economics - where the benefits systems pay the most.

nacho libre

David Blunkett should be feeling guilty today.

Boggles

nacho libre wrote: »

David Blunkett should be feeling guilty today.

Forget to feed the dog?

take everything

Nermal wrote: »

Even in death, he is woke.

I don't want to denigrate this man's death but it's infuriating that even when killed by the very thing they are trying to appease and make sense of, they refuse to deal with its nature and call it for what it is.

That kind of statement by his relatives is irresponsible IMO and just smacks of denial. It's like they don't want to admit his son could have been wrong about what he was dealing with, irrespective of his good nature.

That terrorist and more like him just relish this trusting, even naive, approach.

Hego Damask

So it seemed the racists bigots were correct this time in assuming it was an Islamic attack.
Oh well, even stopped clocks are right at least twice a day.

Anyway, Im off to the airport to welcome Lisa Smith back - innocent Irish citizen - Welcome Home!!

Donald Trump

NewbridgeIR wrote: »

It is a most timid, almost pathetic tribute; have to allow for the fact that he is in shock. But it reads like a resigned acceptance.

Perhaps he shouldn't just accept that he is dead and fight to resurrect him back to life?
Is that what you mean?

Bigboldworld

Great to see the three guys chase the dirty rat down and take him to the deck, to the polish chef with the elephant tusk I salute you sir, when most would run or stand back and record on their phones these guys faced him down and probably saved a lot more lives

20Wheel

Hego Damask wrote: »

So it seemed the racists bigots were correct this time in assuming it was an Islamic attack.

I had it down as the zoroastrians.

Islam... Who'd have guessed.

NewbridgeIR

Donald Trump wrote: »

Perhaps he shouldn't just accept that he is dead and fight to resurrect him back to life?
Is that what you mean?

No, that is not what I mean.

Take Everything's post - above sums up the position well.

Some people will react by just expressing concern for the perpetrators (or people who share their religion) and not mention the victims. It's to be expected- they're not directly involved.

In this case, the father of an innocent victim makes a statement which almost downplays his own child's death and in a weird way almost empathatises with the criminals. Like a form of surrender - "Oh, we mustn't offend or inconvenience anyone."

Donald Trump

NewbridgeIR wrote: »

No, that is not what I mean.

Take Everything's post - above sums up the position well.

Some people will react by just expressing concern for the perpetrators (or people who share their religion) and not mention the victims. It's to be expected- they're not directly involved.

In this case, the father of an innocent victim makes a statement which almost downplays his own child's death and in a weird way almost empathatises with the criminals. Like a form of surrender - "Oh, we mustn't offend or inconvenience anyone."

I think you just didn't understand the statement or else you interpreted it in some mad way. I wouldn't have said what the man said but I don't think there is anything of what you think in it

NewbridgeIR

Donald Trump wrote: »

I think you just didn't understand the statement or else you interpreted it in some mad way. I wouldn't have said what the man said but I don't think there is anything of what you think in it

He said "My son, Jack, who was killed in this attack, would not wish his death to be used as the pretext for more draconian sentences or for detaining people unnecessarily."

The killer was convicted of another crime in February 2012 with a recommendation that he serve at least eight years. If he served the recommended term (not particularly draconian given that it was originally indeterminate, then reduced to 16 years before being halved), then he would not have been free to carry out yesterday's attack.

Donald Trump

NewbridgeIR wrote: »

He said "My son, Jack, who was killed in this attack, would not wish his death to be used as the pretext for more draconian sentences or for detaining people unnecessarily."

The killer was convicted of another crime in February 2012 with a recommendation that he serve at least eight years. If he served the recommended term (not particularly draconian given that it was originally indeterminate, then reduced to 16 years before being halved), then he would not have been free to carry out yesterday's attack.

Do you understand the difference between hindsight and prediction?

Lets take two extremes. One is a society where there are no punishments for anything - nobody wants that.
The other is where any slight misdemeanor is punished with life imprisonment or death. I presume nobody wants that either.

So we have to draw the line in between somewhere. And that is a matter of judgement and can never be an exact science.

You are a victim of confirmation bias and you think that because this fella was in prison and let out that he should have not gotten out. That's grand. But how many others were also let out who didn't stab everyone. If you had a crystal ball that foresaw this then you should have sent his details to the UK police last week.

The father is not talking about this man who did the murdering. He is talking about the others who did not murder and he is saying that his son would not want them to be punished for it.

What do you think would have been the correct response? For him to come out and urge people to "kill a muzzie" or something?

osarusan

Donald Trump wrote: »

I think you just didn't understand the statement or else you interpreted it in some mad way. I wouldn't have said what the man said but I don't think there is anything of what you think in it

Yeah, I interpreted it to mean that if people start going on about deporting loads of Muslims, or locking them up interment-style, and so on, they should not pretend they are doing it in his name.