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

ilkhanid · 25-05-2017 10:45AM

neverever1 wrote: »

So it has been spelled out to you in black and white and you still don't get it! This didn't just start yesterday, this didn't just start in the last few years, this has been going on for decades.
It can't keep being ignored. The history of bombing campaigns over Middle Eastern countries that has been going on for decades is the reason these reprisal attacks are happening. That's not excusing the attacks, it's not justifying the attacks, it's pointing out the cold, hard facts as to why the attacks are happening!

Reprisals against who? How many times do I have to tell you France opposed the Iraq war. Sweden and Denmark didn't bomb anybody. Who did the Yazidis, Iraqi Christians and other sects bomb?

This guy was Libyan. His family were already radicalized. For years now,rival factions and Islamist loons have neen murdering each other.
Did Britain or the USA make them do this? I'm sick of this habit of constantly denying any agency to these people.

As Irish Praetorian said

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

If it's going to be the case that someone born, educated and living in the West is going to turn on their own society simply by virtue of their religion and a sense of shared community with people elsewhere in the world that they perceive as victims .... I'm struck by the fact that once again the attackers are not from these places but from the societies they seek to destroy. If a set of beliefs can drive an otherwise rational person into a violent frenzy, I don't think simply fixing the rest of the world problems (which incidentally is another thing we might have difficulty doing) is going to sway them.

You think this has some kind of rationale; that a Libyan kills himself and a score of innocents in Manchester because of events in Syria? If he was outraged about deaths in Libya, then why wasn't he angry at Assad and his crew that screwed the lid down on that country, 'till it exploded, at the KSA and Qatar and the UAR sponsoring crazy Jihadi killers to further their own never-ending feuds, the Russians using Assad as a means to and end-to keep their base on the coast, Turkey for it's dangerous meddling, Iran for it's support of Assad-no shortage of culpability. Yet the bastard chose to kill teenage girls in his own city. Where's the logic in that? For Chrissake, the man who killed Lee Rigby was a Jamaican! Who bombed Jamaica?
To quote somebody on another thread talking about Afghanistan (but the same logic applies here):

"Why this bizarre assumption that only American bombing radicalises or that is the only radicalisation that counts? Why didn't the bombing of the Soviets, the Afghan Government or the Warlords create recruits for radical Islam? Didn't Taliban cruelties radicalize Uzbek society against Pushtuns? ......It's as if no bomb dropped on a village radicalizes unless it's an American bomb. It's as if no war counts as war until the Americans arrive".

"The history of bombing campaigns over Middle Eastern countries that has been going on for decades"

Islamist radicalisation has been going on for over over sixty years. It was Islamists who murdered Sadat in Egypt. Islamists murdered a hunded thousand (at the very least) people in Algeria, a country untouched by American or British bombs in the nineties , well before Iraq.

Danzy · 25-05-2017 10:47AM

I'd like to see any Mosque who was involved or knowingly tolerated fund raising for Jihadist groups to be closed.

Any Mosque where hatred and a call to violence or murder against other groups in society to be closed.

Any Mosque that disseminates material that advocate violence or murder against other groups in society.

The State should have done this but fearful of the backlash they have turned a blind eye and the problem grows.

Would a 1/3 or 1/2 be closed?

munsterlegend · 25-05-2017 10:49AM

Seems to be something happening in Trafford college with army being brought in.

Looks like bomb disposal unit called in so may be just a suspicious package.

Danzy · 25-05-2017 10:52AM

neverever1 wrote: »

So it has been spelled out to you in black and white and you still don't get it! This didn't just start yesterday, this didn't just start in the last few years, this has been going on for decades.
It can't keep being ignored. The history of bombing campaigns over Middle Eastern countries that has been going on for decades is the reason these reprisal attacks are happening. That's not excusing the attacks, it's not justifying the attacks, it's pointing out the cold, hard facts as to why the attacks are happening!

That will teach France and Sweden for opposing intervention.

The groups involved are clear on why they do it, retaliation for western intervention is down the list, things like disbelief, not following the Sharia, fornication etc are all above it.

People like you just see them as helpless brown people who can't reason for themselves but can only react to what Whitey does. That they have no framework of belief or reasoning out of reaction.

Their ancestors were building civilizations when Europe was still under Ice, they are not as thick and innocent as you degrade them to be.

The_Kew_Tour · 25-05-2017 10:55AM

What about that Big Mosque in Dublin?

I have heard few here say its got few dodgy people going into it.

Any evidence

mikeybrennan · 25-05-2017 11:00AM

Danzy wrote: »

I'd like to see any Mosque who was involved or knowingly tolerated fund raising for Jihadist groups to be closed.

Any Mosque where hatred and a call to violence or murder against other groups in society to be closed.

Any Mosque that disseminates material that advocate violence or murder against other groups in society.

The State should have done this but fearful of the backlash they have turned a blind eye and the problem grows.

Would a 1/3 or 1/2 be closed?

Doesnt work,It just drives them underground

It's preferable to leave the mosque open .They can keep track of comings and goings .

Prob already covert surveillance inside many of these places,bugging ,undercover informants.

They're an 'asset' being left open

Boggy Turf · 25-05-2017 11:00AM

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

What about that Big Mosque in Dublin?

I have heard few here say its got few dodgy people going into it.

Any evidence

You could say the exact same for the Dáil, the Garda HQ and the head office of Ireland's main banks

Danzy · 25-05-2017 11:00AM

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

What about that Big Mosque in Dublin?

I have heard few here say its got few dodgy people going into it.

Any evidence

Well it is affiliated to a man called Al Qaradawi, considered the leading Sunni Scholar alive today.

His views on apostasy, Jews, gays, apostate largely revolve around the death penalty.

For women it is all about obedience of beating.

He has supported Suicide bombings.

The peaceful ahmadiyya sect of Islam (if they can be considered Islamic given the believe in a Prophet after Mo), their leader in Ireland who is often on the news has spoken out against Clonskeagh Mosque.

conorhal · 25-05-2017 11:02AM

Deleted User wrote: »

Where are the people who said his family was anti-Jihad etc.? The fact they went back to Libya as it is now suggested otherwise but it was thrown out as a fact right from the off.

They slink off when the facts don't suit the 'mentally ill lone-wolf' narrative that they automatically spin every time this occurs as a form of damage control.
The family fled Gaddafi's secular regime. Many fleeing Syria are islamists fleeing from a failed uprising against a secular regime. I'm not saying most don't have legitimate reasons and that either dictator wasn't a repressive bastard, but the ideology of many of those standing against them and subsequently into flooding Europe are sketchy at best and should be considered.

The_Kew_Tour · 25-05-2017 11:03AM

Boggy Turf wrote: »

You could say the exact same for the Dáil, the Garda HQ and the head office of Ireland's main banks

Fair Point:pac:

The_Kew_Tour · 25-05-2017 11:04AM

Danzy wrote: »

Well it is affiliated to a man called Al Qaradawi, considered the leading Sunni Scholar alive today.

His views on apostasy, Jews, gays, apostate largely revolve around the death penalty.

For women it is all about obedience of beating.

He has supported Suicide bombings.

The peaceful ahmadiyya sect of Islam (if they can be considered Islamic given the believe in a Prophet after Mo), their leader in Ireland who is often on the news has spoken out against Clonskeagh Mosque.

Cheers for that.

If he is opposed to those people then its really worrying

neverever1 · 25-05-2017 11:06AM

ilkhanid wrote: »

Reprisals against who? How many times do I have to tell you France opposed
the Iraq war. Sweden and Denmark didn't bomb anybody. Who did the Yazidis, Iraqi Christians and other sects bomb?

This guy was Libyan. His family were already radicalized. For years now,rival factions and Islamist loons have neen murdering each other.
Did Britain or the USA make them do this? I'm sick of this to deny any agency to these people.

Against 'the west'! These groups will attack many places because they see them as Western and a part of their enemy but it has been shown already that every country you mentioned has either assisted countries that bombed the Middle East or has bombed them themselves.
The bombing campaign in the Middle East didn't just start in the last decade. What do you think happens when whole cities, towns communities get flattened? All the survivors just get on with life and forget about it? No conflict arises? No hatred of those who killed your relatives, destroyed your life?

conorhal · 25-05-2017 11:06AM

mikeybrennan wrote: »

Doesnt work,It just drives them underground

It's preferable to leave the mosque open .They can keep track of comings and goings .

Prob already covert surveillance inside many of these places,bugging ,undercover informants.

They're an 'asset' being left open

They should be underground.
Is it really better that they should be allowed openly advocate this kind of ideology? That just legitimizes it in the eyes of many (how could something so open be so wrong?) and worse, as the mosque is the center of most islamic communities it creates a power base for these regressive loons to control and dictate to that community.
They belong in basements and back rooms, not in communities. Let MI5 hunt them there.

Danzy · 25-05-2017 11:07AM

mikeybrennan wrote: »

Doesnt work,It just drives them underground

It's preferable to leave the mosque open .They can keep track of comings and goings .

Prob already covert surveillance inside many of these places,bugging ,undercover informants.

They're an 'asset' being left open

I don't disagree with that.

It does open up the scenario though where it leads to the arrests of countless Imams for preaching or does it just leave a situation where plots are only looked at.

neverever1 · 25-05-2017 11:08AM

Danzy wrote: »

That will teach France and Sweden for opposing intervention.

The groups involved are clear on why they do it, retaliation for western intervention is down the list, things like disbelief, not following the Sharia, fornication etc are all above it.

People like you just see them as helpless brown people who can't reason for themselves but can only react to what Whitey does. That they have no framework of belief or reasoning out of reaction.

Their ancestors were building civilizations when Europe was still under Ice, they are not as thick and innocent as you degrade them to be.

Read what the attackers sister said.

munsterlegend · 25-05-2017 11:09AM

munsterlegend wrote: »

Seems to be something happening in Trafford college with army being brought in.

Looks like bomb disposal unit called in so may be just a suspicious package.

The incident is not at Trafford college but Linby Street in Hulme.

conorhal · 25-05-2017 11:14AM

Danzy wrote: »

I don't disagree with that.

It does open up the scenario though where it leads to the arrests of countless Imams for preaching or does it just leave a situation where plots are only looked at.

Except that doesn't happen. Look at Abu Hamza, it too 20yrs and a technicality to get rid of him. Nobody's going after these preachers and in the meantime they are spreading poison in their communities having a very substantial impact radicalizing them. Leaving them in place will only leave you mopping up the results of their spreading ideology. They are the root cause that need to be tackled.

jmayo · 25-05-2017 11:20AM

conorhal wrote: »

Except that doesn't happen. Look at Abu Hamza, it too 20yrs and a technicality to get rid of him. Nobody's going after these preachers and in the meantime they are spreading poison in their communities having a very substantial impact radicalizing them. Leaving them in place will only leave you mopping up the results of their spreading ideology. They are the root cause that need to be tackled.

Also the ones spreading radical islam in prisons need to be isolated from the general population.
I couldn't give two fooks if it is seen as against their human rights if they have to spend 23 hours a day in lockdown, rather than spread their hateful delusional bile to a new generation of attackers.

That is where a fair few of the French attackers had become radicalised.

Danzy · 25-05-2017 11:22AM

neverever1 wrote: »

Read what the attackers sister said.

Instead of going for an Islamic State familiy view I take it from the Org. itself.

The anger of the bomber is over the targeting of the Islamic State for destruction. The loss of life there is an aside.

Gamebred · 25-05-2017 11:22AM

Reported in the rags that he was reported to security services before by friends and it wasnt acted upon, very worrying if true, also his father posted a picture of his brother holding a machine gun in cammo clothing,

the trip to germany is no surprise either a hell hole that is due another massacre soon thanks to Merkel.

neverever1 · 25-05-2017 11:26AM

Danzy wrote: »

Instead of going for an Islamic State familiy view I take it from the Org. itself.

The anger of the bomber is over the targeting of the Islamic State for destruction. The loss of life there is an aside.

So the sister is guilty by association? She would have been closer to her brother than you or I, read the reasons she has given, stop making up your own.

ilkhanid · 25-05-2017 11:27AM

neverever1 wrote: »

Against 'the west'! These groups will attack many places because they see them as Western and a part of their enemy but it has been shown already that every country you mentioned has either assisted countries that bombed the Middle East or has bombed them themselves.
The bombing campaign in the Middle East didn't just start in the last decade. What do you think happens when whole cities, towns communities get flattened? All the survivors just get on with life and forget about it? No conflict arises? No hatred of those who killed your relatives, destroyed your life?

Once again:whom did Sweden bomb? What towns did Sweden flatten? They murdered Japanese citizens in Iraq. What towns did Japan flatten? They murdered Swiss tourists in Egypt. What towns did Switzerland flatten? They blew up a UN building in Iraq. Whom did the UN bomb? What towns did the people of Mumbai flatten? What towns did the people of Sierra Leone or Burkino Faso, Uganda and Kenya and the Phillippines flatten? Yet they too have been the objects of Jihadi fury. They kill their own people with as much facility as Europeans but it's only when they kill Europeans do you try to rationalise it.
When innocents are slaughtered by Jihadi madmen from Manchester to East Africa to Asia you'll twist and turn and reach to locate the fault in the country or people who "provoked" the Jihadis wrath. Who did you think is doing the flattening of towns and cities in Syria now?
Assad and Russia. Who do you think flattened Hama back in '81. Assad's dad. 600 towns and villages were flattened or depopulated in Saddam's Anfal campaign back in the eightes, yet the Kurds didn't turn to Jihadism. Jaysus-you'd think that these countries were are happy, untroubled places until the Americans blundered in.

neverever1 wrote: »

... read the reasons she has given....

Yes. I did and my point still stands. to paraphrase myself......

"He didn't care about the 13 000 people-some of them children-murdered by Assad's Muqhabarat and allied militias.
He didn't care about the dead children killed by the barrel bombs dropped day and night on Aleppo and other towns.
He didn't care about all the children killed by Russian bombings.
He didn't care about the children and adults murdered by IS.
He didn't care about the children and adults murdered by Jabat Al'Nusra and the other armed groups".
When a hundred people were murdered by a Jihadi targeting a refugee convoy, of all things, back in April, (how many chilren died that day) that didn't perturb his mind, because it didn't fit in with his extremist narrative.

He only saw what he wanted to see. He only saw through a mind twisted by Islamist ideology. He filtered out all the deaths and atrocities that were'nt congruent with his world view. When will eejits here stop taking these scumbags at their word? When these loons use words, the words don't mean the same things that they mean to us. How could they? It would be laughable if it was not so irritating to see the bien-pensant here claim to understand the righteous indignation of these Jihadis at the deaths of children..or whoever. What right have these warriors of the Caliphate to claim any indignation over innocent deaths? They don't. To them it's only the deaths of our people that count. Christians don't count, Yazidis don't count, Shias don't count. When they murder children, then the victims are either vermin to be killed or (if they are pious Sunnis) they are going straight to Allah, so no harm done. He-and all the rest of them- claimed to be angry at the death of innocents yet supported an organisation that shot down two hundred old women into a mass grave.

Sorry. Not buying it.
.

sjb25 · 25-05-2017 11:28AM

munsterlegend wrote: »

The incident is not at Trafford college but Linby Street in Hulme.

Incident over suspicious package but was nothing

selwyn froggitt · 25-05-2017 11:32AM

jmayo wrote: »

Also the ones spreading radical islam in prisons need to be isolated from the general population.
I couldn't give two fooks if it is seen as against their human rights if they have to spend 23 hours a day in lockdown, rather than spread their hateful delusional bile to a new generation of attackers.

That is where a fair few of the French attackers had become radicalised.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/apr/21/extremist-inmates-to-be-held-in-separation-centres-inside-prisons

Irish Praetorian · 25-05-2017 11:32AM

My name is URL wrote: »

Coz there couldn't possibly be anything in between rage and indifference could there? :rolleyes:

Like stupidity for example? If I say there is nothing but those two extremes feel free to go nuts but as I havent spare yourself the aggro.

Danzy · 25-05-2017 11:33AM

neverever1 wrote: »

So the sister is guilty by association? She would have been closer to her brother than you or I, read the reasons she has given, stop making up your own.

I'm giving the reasons as repeated again and again by groups like Islamic State.

Yourself isit · 25-05-2017 11:35AM

Exeggcute wrote: »

Sweden used its air force in the NATO campaign against Gaddafi in Libya.

The do extensive arms exports to dictatorships in the Middle East.

Radical jihadis also seem to refer to the West in their propaganda. Being a part of the EU is enough justification for them no doubt. Throw Shannon airport into the mix and we would be very naive to think we are not a target, especially since we might be perceived as a soft target.

The problem with that analysis is that the radicals didn't like ghadaffi.

It's true that the bombing of Libya is in part responsible for manchester, but it was a form of "liberal interventionism".

If Assad and ghadaffi were left to win that would be the excuse for Islamist terror.

NinjaKirby · 25-05-2017 11:37AM

Boggy Turf wrote: »

Honest question but what can police do if they believe someone has been "radicalised" and may be a a real threat. Is it enough to arrest?
Can they really monitor all "radicalised" young men on a daily basis?

In the UK they have football banning orders.

http://www.inbrief.co.uk/football-law/football-banning-orders/

You can basically end up banned from public places before and following football matches.

In Scotland, this can include sectarian abuse. So if you are raving about how much you hate Catholics at a football match in Scotland you can find yourself banned from football stadiums and public spaces around football stadiums when a match is scheduled.

You can even be banned from World Cup events etc.

"A control period will start five days before an overseas match or tournament and will last until the event has finished. The police have the power to intercept and prevent an individual (who is not already subject to a banning order) from travelling if they have evidence that that person has previously been involved in violence or disorder and that they have grounds for suspecting that the individual continues to pose a risk. An individual who has been intercepted in this manner must face court proceedings for a banning order within 24 hours of being intercepted."

If they can prove that someone has been radicalized then surely similar banning orders could be put into place?

Obviously I can see the issues here with racial profiling etc and there would need to be A LOT of work going into this kind of thing (I guess it would at least create jobs) but I don't see any reason why it can't be done.

As of November 2016 there were 2,085 active banning orders in the UK.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/2016/11/24/newcastle-united-top-list-football-banning-orders-wolves-plymouth/

Danzy · 25-05-2017 11:45AM

NinjaKirby wrote: »

In the UK they have football banning orders.

http://www.inbrief.co.uk/football-law/football-banning-orders/

You can basically end up banned from public places before and following football matches.

In Scotland, this can include sectarian abuse. So if you are raving about how much you hate Catholics at a football match in Scotland you can find yourself banned from football stadiums and public spaces around football stadiums when a match is scheduled.

You can even be banned from World Cup events etc.

"A control period will start five days before an overseas match or tournament and will last until the event has finished. The police have the power to intercept and prevent an individual (who is not already subject to a banning order) from travelling if they have evidence that that person has previously been involved in violence or disorder and that they have grounds for suspecting that the individual continues to pose a risk. An individual who has been intercepted in this manner must face court proceedings for a banning order within 24 hours of being intercepted."

If they can prove that someone has been radicalized then surely similar banning orders could be put into place?

Obviously I can see the issues here with racial profiling etc and there would need to be A LOT of work going into this kind of thing (I guess it would at least create jobs) but I don't see any reason why it can't be done.

As of November 2016 there were 2,085 active banning orders in the UK.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/2016/11/24/newcastle-united-top-list-football-banning-orders-wolves-plymouth/

The harsh truth is that there is so many that they could appropriately and justly target in this manner that it would quickly become unmanageable for the police.

When 27% of British Muslims sympathized with the Charlie Hebdo attackers and one in ten said that satirical cartoonists deserve to be attacked, you have a problem.

seamus · 25-05-2017 11:49AM

ilkhanid wrote: »

In short, he'd have to be living in a cave not to have seen these things. Open a newspaper, look at the TV,these scenes are all over the place.
In short he carefully cherry-picked what he chose to get outraged about.

So does everyone involved in these things. You're expecting a bit much for anyone involved in any armed conflict to employ objective reflection before taking action.

IRA supporters conveniently ignore IRA atrocities. Unionists conveniently ignore unionist atrocities.

That's not surprising, people pick a side and then defend that side and consider their actions to be a response to some other atrocity from the other side beforehand. Back-and-forth-and-back-and-forth for decades.

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

Comments