London terror attack confirmed by Met Police

STB. wrote: »

In Saudi Arabia you dont get citizenship if you are not Muslim. Infact if you are born of a Muslim father and attempt to change religion, the punishment is severe. Death.

Sweetemotion wrote: »

Well it matters if your a woman and want to drive in Saudi Arabia.

I don't think we would want to emulate what they do in Saudi Arabia.

Phoebas wrote: »

I don't think we would want to emulate what they do in Saudi Arabia.

No we dont. It was context to how wide apart our freedom is in the first place.

Europe does tolerance all too well.

Where has that got us ?

Phoebas wrote: »

I don't think we would want to emulate what they do in Saudi Arabia.

But 40% of muslims living in the Uk want Sharia law imposed.

That's almost 1.3 million people wanting to live under sharia law in the UK alone.

That is the population of our Capital city and you still see it as tiny minority.

bubblypop wrote: »

Oh definitely not.
With their Irish pubs & shops & gaa clubs all over the world.....

Irish pubs abroad are owned by more non-Irish than Irish from my experience.

Phoebas wrote: »

You do understand that the UK and Ireland are two different countries ?

Of course I do.

I do find it somewhat reassuring that these monstrous fanatics weren't able to acquire Kalashnikov weaponry and a scene didn't transpire similar to the last Paris attack. No doubt if were able to acquire them they would have used them and would murder as many people as possible. Hopefully that is because of the efforts of the security services that made it impossible for them to acquire them.

I was pleased to hear the comments from Threasa May who this time did not shrink from referring to the real cause of these attacks - radical Islamist views, at the risk of offending law abiding Muslims.

I wasn't so pleased though to see politicians use this event to support the case for new laws to require IT companies to break their encryption, that once brought in would never be rescinded. In this case of the 3 men who bought a Van and blades, I don't think any of that would have been prevented by breaking computer encryption. If they weren't on a watch list, I think that's still unclear at this stage, then it's possible that the way they communicated with each other could have been conducted on non encrypted services - like phone calls and private personal meetings. In other words if encryption is broken I think they will find ways to interact with each other regardless.

AllForIt wrote: »

...and a scene didn't transpire similar to the last Paris attack.

To be fair to the French, I think the last few attacks have been thwarted, that we know about anyway, there was the guy at orly airport who was about to attack a soldier and was shot dead, and the other was another guy with a knife at the louvre who was also shot dead by (armed) police.

So one of the London Bridge attackers lived in Ireland up to last 12 months

MPFGLB wrote: »

So one of the London Bridge attackers lived in Ireland up to last 12 months

I heard that also around the time

RustyNut wrote: »

Whatever about anything else I'd have to say 10 out of 10 to the London police. 8 minutes from the first call to the stopping of the attackers. Medals for them lads I hope.

And for that civilian that was fighting back too

AllForIt wrote: »

Well it's an interesting question as to whether these people are really 'mad' or 'thick' or if they are neither, and they are just of the rational opinion that their world view should pervade, and that they themselves would take any measures possible to make it so.

Ideology is a funny thing because you can't, or can you, put it all down to some sort of predisposed psychological condition.

More likely I feel, is that the community you live in has a profound effect on one's personal opinions, ones the are passed down from generation to generation that over time get's tweaked along the way, hopefully for a fairer and more just society. And in some communities it doesn't go that way but gets more and more totalitarian.

So I would say that the perpetrators of last nights attack are ppl who have personally rationally concluded that their world view is of such utmost importance that they are willing to die for it. I don't think we should let them off the hook by suggesting their just mad or thick which would absolve them in some part for their heinous actions.

Found this article decent

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/03/what-isis-really-wants/384980/?utm_source=SFFB

vicwatson wrote: »

I heard that also around the time

Around the time? It was 26 hours ago.

Widdershins wrote: »

It's disturbing to read quotes from neighbours of the attackers. They're all saying how very nice the men had seemed. You just never know what is going on in someone's head. They don't wear a sign around their neck, they don't have horns.

Yes this is a very relevant point in all of this and I've noticed it myself when acquaintance of terrorists have described them in glowing terms. Could't meet a nicer guy type of thing.

But this just supports my position that these ppl arn't mad, rather they have rationally decided to murder people for the sake of their own world view. I don't think there is anything worse than killing people based on a world view. Serial killers are psychopaths , suffering from a mental condition, but your average terrorist is suffering from no such mental condition, thus I think they are the worst of the worst, as they are completely in control of their faculties.