London terror attack confirmed by Met Police

wonderfullife wrote: »

Exactly.

Also ask yourself why the IRA's campaign escalated dramatically in the decade after Bloody Sunday.

Same answer. Revenge.

The tendency when you see innocent men, women and children murdered by a State is to want to seek revenge. Attacking the State itself is impossible for terrorists so they just seek to attack easy targets within their means.

Salman rushdie might want to know what offense he committed back in the eighties to invite such anger and vitriol, long before even the first gulf war.

Phoebas wrote: »

Clearly there are places in the world where it isn't a choice, but in the UK or Ireland, it is.
And, as I said, there are societal pressures on people, but the choice exists.

I was responding (as you were) to someone who mentioned seeing Muslim women dropping their children off to school here, so I'm talking about the position here.

Anyway, still not seeing how this relates to the terror attack (apart from using it as a cynical way to berate Muslim women and their choice of dress and conflate it with terrorism)

No, it is not a choice in the uk. The BBC investigation demonstrates exactly that!

I have a gay Muslim acquaintance in England who is considered an apostate and nervous that some day he will be beaten up or worse if others in his so-called community find out.

I don't think you really have much awareness of these issues, which is not your fault!

Gringo180 wrote: »

What has he said thats wrong? These arent real muslims carrying out these attacks.

Why are they not real Muslims?

jackofalltrades wrote: »

Why are they not real Muslims?

4% of the British population is Islamic. If real muslims are all like these savages then Britain would be on fire. These radicals are a tiny minority. About 000.5 % of the 3 million living in the UK.

Gringo180 wrote: »

4% of the British population is Islamic. If real muslims are all like these savages then Britain would be on fire. These radicals are a tiny minority. About 000.5 % of the 3 million living in the UK.

When are those 3 million (minus of course the 000.5% of radicals) going to take a stand against this stuff?

Are they marching to make a difference?
Are they doing something credible to counter this image of their beliefs?
What are they doing?
Absolutely nothing.

If you believe in something then stand up for it!

wonderfullife wrote: »

Because gay-bashing is purely a Muslim problem?

The amount of Irish men who have been slagged off, punched, intimidated or bullied for being *a homo/fag* is scary.

I've seen it with my own 2 eyes over the years the abuse some people get for merely strolling out of the George.

In Russia, the nation that many have argued is our *friend* in the fight against ISIS, you're absolutely likely to be battered if you're outed.

I've a feeling this you might be working for the Clonskeagh Mosque as you keep deflecting away from
Islam having anything wrong with it!
Oh what about the Russians
What about the IRA
What about the Christians

Stop deflecting or come clean! You protest to much!

After Paris and other attacks, millions of people came together to show solidarity.

Why the heck have these millions of Muslims ( who do not support extremism) not come together and done their own march or vigil?

Why the heck haven't they taken ownership of their own destinies?

By not doing so they are indirectly saying : "praise be to you my jihadi brother. I totally support you"

Hell yeah!!

Hope you're in Paradise!!
Coz that's what we totally believe in!

You're rockin it in Para with 27 virgins. Hollleee... crap.
Praise be to you my friend and to AL as well!

It ain't no atrocity to us! It just keeps the movement going!

Keep rockin!!

!

Deleted User wrote: »

Ah, wonderfullife still spreading their wisdom.

Even after it was clear as day, we were still graced with your expert opinion in the Manchester thread. Always shouting down people who jump to conclusions, such a hypocrite. Your head is firmly buried in the sand or somewhere else

You posted the below when the writing was clearly on the wall. The police had already used the word explosion, a video in the thread showed a bright flash and loud bang, yet your forensic investigation brought you to the conclusion below


What exactly is your game?

The game is - and that's the perfect word - the game is to be above the sudden giant population of racists (who don't have a problem with hinduism, or buddhism strangely enough, and never mention skin colour), and the ISLAMAPHOBES, and the white supremecists who we are now seemingly crawling with. We have anti-fascists who's biggest fear is the spread of fascist idealogy and say it must be confronted as soon as it rears its head, but who then go on to say this other fascist ideology has mostly decent adherents so we will let that slide intellectually. A coordinate continental campaign of violence from people telling us they are doing it for allah, but no they couldn't possibly know their own motivations.

The way to win the game is to smear other people and lie to yourself and say terrorism is nothing more than peanut allergies. You can win by simply saying it will not effect you. Of course the rest of us just cant keep a cool head apparently and are thus losing the game.

An interesting thing recently is the 'let's not speculate' posts have completely vanished from the start of these threads. An implication in and of itself that this is becoming normalised.

sdanseo wrote: »

There's a huge difference between arming the police and arming all civilians.



I'm not as open minded when it comes to arming the police. They should be armed. They should be suitably trained and able to react and protect people and when you have a group of people with machetes who are not afraid to die, a telescopic baton doesn't cut the mustard in terms of reaction.

We are at a difficult position here in Ireland with An Garda. Arming such a dysfunctional organisation with so many individuals who are unfit, would be very dangerous IMO. A select group of police only should be selected and trained.

wonderfullife wrote: »

There was absolutely zero available footage of the typical signs of an explosion. Zero! That's why I said it! And the reason there was zero signs is because the bomb went off outside the venue.

A typical sign of an explosion and/or point of detonation is smoke, fire, debris, structural damage of walls, ceilings, injuries.

We saw none of that because it happened outside and wasn't filmed.

I'm sorry you can't twist some nefarious meaning to a very basic post I made.

Maybe it was a helium balloon?