Terrorist Attack in Manchester (Read MOD WARNING in OP Updated 24/05/2017))

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

Shouting in public on your own is surely mental?

Yea you see the report I heard this morning said "praying in public" then it became "chanting in public", and now by you, it's "shouting in public".

Muslims pray at particular times of day no matter where they are. We've a couple of parents at in our local kids football club that will pray at the side of the pitch while their kids train. Last time I went through Manchester Airport there were several praying in the middle of the terminal. My point is, a Muslim praying in public is in no way unusual. Less common here granted, but something you would see daily in Manchester.

Gamebred wrote: »

I presume victims of this will be suing the state, will be plenty of pdsd claims with people struggling to go back to work again ect, will be interesting to if the state or arena will be sued.

Sued for what exactly?

What have either done wrong?

TimeToShine wrote: »

Libya isn't currently accessible by plane - you have to fly to one of the bordering countries (Tunisia/Egypt) through France or maybe Turkey and then drive. I'd say the secret service will have their hands full tracking every flight into those countries.

But these people were known- so they obviously were tracking them. They just did nothing about it.

blanch152 wrote: »

When the debate descends to "your terrorists were worse than my terrorists", you know that the IRA apologists are in town.

Simply put, there is no excuse for terrorist violence, be that ISIS, IRA, INLA, UVF, Taliban or anyone else. When I see people today saying that the IRA bombings in Manchester were ok because they gave warnings or that other bombings were ok because soldiers drank in the pubs or that other bombings were some other alphabet soup other than the IRA, I get sickened.

Can you guys leave the defence of the IRA to one side for even one day?

I have no time for PIRA, INLA, sf and check my posts or even how I have been infracted around here for daring to challenge a very well known now departed poster about how he could stand by Warrington.

But even I realise there is a huge difference between PIRA (ETA, FARC, etc) and ISSI/al qaeda.

Hell the likes of the PLO or Black September in the 70s posed a different threat than the likes of modern day ISIS.
They hijacked planes, killed Israelies or Jews, but didn't engage in wholesale slaughters.

PIRA were after one thing which was definable and that was removal of Britain from Northern Ireland.
Granted al qaeda goals are more definable, but ISIS and their hangers on are for the birds.
They want a caliphate, which is basically all of us to convert to their religion and be subservient.

PIRA generally targeted certain people like (soldiers, politicians, security forces), sometimes not very successfully which did mean poor defenseless civilians were slaughtered.
In the end they were more interested in causing huge financial damage to the UK and hence the likes of Manchester city centre, Canary Wharf which caused billions in damage but with deaths of two.
Two men were killed in Canary Wharf because they didn't evacuate far enough away.

ISIS and their hangers on are the exact opposite they want to slaughter as many as possible.
It is a different more insidious threat.

And I don't think you will find many non "republicans" saying saying PIRA attacks were ok.

Jayop wrote: »

There's no simple fix. That's what I and others have been saying whilst being accused of everything up to justifying terrorism.

Internment won't fix it

interment of anyone found to be radicalised and with links to ISIS will take people out of circulation and remove a threat.

Jayop wrote: »

Just stopping bombing won't fix it

No but it would remove an excuse. Then again they will just continue slaughtering each other over tribal or religious sect differences.

Jayop wrote: »

Not just supporting Saudi Arabia won't fix it

That could help halt the spread of radical islam.

Jayop wrote: »

Deportation of some suspects won't fix it

Again it will remove dangers from our society and free up intelligence resources.
If someone who is a guest/new arrival/immigrant/refugee/migrant in a state is tying to subvert the state or engaged in criminality then they fook off.

Jayop wrote: »

Banning immigration won't fix it

Why should we accept immigrants from cultures and societies that have proven to be hard to integrate into our existing societies.

None of these things will fix it, but those ideas if implemented in some fashion can help cut down the risks.
Claiming we can't do them because we might look bad or something never worked before properly somewhere is defeatist and leaving ourselves open to more attacks.

Jayop wrote: »

Force feeding Muslims Pork or burying them in pigs blood certainly won't fix it. (I'm still flabbergasted that these two were proffered as solutions)

Io think that is taken from an old movie Gary Cooper about fighting muslims in Philipines?

Jayop wrote: »

Radical clerics should if at all possible be removed. If they can be deported then do so. If they can be charged with a crime and locked up then do that.
Stop supporting regimes that support ISIS and fund them. That seems a no brainer to me.
And yeah, stop bombing people in the ME. It's not worked, it's never going to work and it's just making people more radical that are already here.

Will those measures completely stop terrorism? Will they ****. They might help reduce it though.

Agreed.

Faugheen wrote: »

Blame everything on anyone other than the perpetrator. Typical when something like this happens.

What were the authorities supposed to do? Did they have anything on him? Just because he's known doesn't mean they can just detain him whenever they want.

People need to stop talking about things they literally know **** all about. A man killed 22 people, so stop blaming the police.

I blame the courts, particularly the EU courts. The police would gladly lock him up if they could have.

bubblypop wrote: »

I don't understand the problem?
A town that isn't populated by white faced Catholics is it?

How's that working out for the UK and France at the moment? Perhaps you can explain how integration will work in that scenerio, unless you mean the Irish locals need to learn to integrate?

Gamebred wrote: »

Human rights brigade would cry their eyes out if he was detained on return from Libya.

but surely the time has come when the right to a safe environment to live in, takes precedent over the human rights of a small minority of seriously disturbed people?

and its up to the security officials to get this right without breaching human rights - ie they surely have enough intelligence build up now to be able to nab these criminals, if the right laws are supporting them.

jmayo wrote: »

PIRA generally targeted certain people like (soldiers, politicians, security forces), sometimes not very successfully which did mean poor defenseless civilians were slaughtered.
In the end they were more interested in causing huge financial damage to the UK and hence the likes of Manchester city centre, Canary Wharf which caused billions in damage but with deaths of two.
Two men were killed in Canary Wharf because they didn't evacuate far enough away.

But that's just not true. The IRA killed AND targeted civilians all the time. And the people who ordered them are in very influential positions in Irish life. Like it or not people need to dump the "our terrorists good, their terrorists bad" routine.

Kingsmill, 11
Warrington, 2
Enniskillen, 11
Red Lion, 3
Abercorn, 2
Claudy, 9
Coleraine, 6
Birmingham, 21
Hilton Hotel, 2
La Mon bombing, 12
Dunmurray train, 3
20th April (multiple locations), 2
Harrods bombing, 3 + 3
Victoria Station, 1
Teebane, 7
Baltic exchange, 3
Bishopsgate Bomb, 1
Docklands bomb, 2

Gamebred wrote: »

No the problem is lack of integration in the town.

I think some seem determined to keep repeating 'nothing to see here' untill things literally blow up in their faces, and even then they'll be insisting that the real victims are ordinary Muslims and the solution is to double down on a failed migration policy. It's masochism at a societal level and those promoting it certiantly have no answers.