London terror attack confirmed by Met Police

Timberrrrrrrr · 05-06-2017 02:32PM

Really Interested wrote: »

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2014/08/pakistan-ahmadiyya-an-absence-justice-20148616414279536.html

"Since 1974, Ahmadis have been declared "non-Muslim" under Pakistani law, after a constitutional amendment was passed under the government of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto."

"The law imposes three-year jail terms on Ahmadis "who directly or indirectly, poses himself as a Muslim, or calls, or refers to, his faith as Islam, or preaches or propagates his faith, or invites others to accept his faith, by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representations, or in any manner whatsoever outrages the religious feelings of Muslims"."

Doesn't explain this idiotic part of his post though

"many of the countries you idolise"

neverever1 · 05-06-2017 02:33PM

Trump_Wall wrote: »

So, Saudi and Qatari funding of Wahhabist and Salafist Islam has a negligible impact?

It's one thing opposing Western foreign policy, quite another to hack innocent people on the streets in the hope of going to heaven. That link can only be made by extremist preachers and the above funding. It's the latter we need to condemn. Let's not get so masochistic and blame ourselves for the world's problems.

I'm not blaming ourselves, I'm blaming Britain/America. The people who are attacking innocents are disgusting lowlifes, we can't ignore the reason for their existence though!

Really Interested · 05-06-2017 02:34PM

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Doesn't explain this idiotic part of his post though

"many of the countries you idolise"

I assume you don't idolise any particular country.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Ahmadis

While I do not normally like to use Wikipedia it does have a list of countries.

delly · 05-06-2017 02:35PM

It's emerged that one of the attackers was resident here for a period.

https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2017/0605/880356-garda-meeting-london-attack/

Help!!!! · 05-06-2017 02:35PM

neverever1 wrote: »

We can talk about the history of Christianity as well but it has nothing to do with this modern situation. The fact is that if the West had not flattened many Middle Eastern countries for the past century then these groups like Isis would be minuscule and very easy to control.

So why are they not shouting this is for Syria rather than Allahau Akbar?
Honestly I think your just trolling at this stage

ChikiChiki · 05-06-2017 02:35PM

Dude89 wrote: »

We're are liberal, PC joke of a country and I worry about
our future security. One of the attackers from Saturday
spent time in Ireland recently no doubt planning
terrorism related as Scotland yard are investigating it.

The concern is now that he has been identified, the possibility of attacks by acquaintances as the police net closes in. That scares the **** out of me.

Timberrrrrrrr · 05-06-2017 02:36PM

Really Interested wrote: »

I assume you don't idolise any particular country.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Ahmadis

While I do not normally like to use Wikipedia it does have a list of countries.

I don't,

It seems that particular poster reads a post then.makes up his/her own conclusions and adds bits in to suit his/her own agenda.

Skullface McGubbin · 05-06-2017 02:38PM

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

Well this is embarrassing, type of shíte that goes on all the time no doubt in the media

Reminds me of this

d45d80334c76a97e379e989a6ec8e1e506bd455f48d4ff0cda7cc035c5c90321.jpg

DeanAustin · 05-06-2017 02:38PM

Dude89 wrote: »

Anyone just hear that on sky news "That Ireland and Finland have the highest % of Muslim's going to jihad"
That is absolutely shocking I'm not surprised really it's quite obvious they see Ireland as an easy target because we're an absolute joke.

Go easy on the self loathing.

neverever1 · 05-06-2017 02:38PM

wakka12 wrote: »

When the terrorists in London shouted this is for allah while hacking innocent people to death does that not make you think they were doing this more so in the name of god than anything else? Would they not have shouted this is for syria (insert other bombed country) while carrying out the attack if it was for the reasons you suggest?

I haven't said that these murderers aren't brainwashed by the preachers etc who feed them these fantasies about religion. I'm saying that no one can be radicalised without the bombing campaigns. It simply would not happen and these extreme groups would be tiny and irrelevant.

testaccount123 · 05-06-2017 02:39PM

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

I don't,

It seems that particular poster reads a post then.makes up his/her own conclusions and adds bits in to suit his/her own agenda.

Ah sorry I just figured because you are so big on Islam you'd naturally love states controlled by it. You must be tempted to move to the middle east though all the same.

Timberrrrrrrr · 05-06-2017 02:40PM

testaccount123 wrote: »

Ah sorry I just figured because you are so big on Islam you'd naturally love states controlled by it. You must be tempted to move to the middle east though all the same.

Idiotic post is idiotic

It does show that you have nonisea though, few I've been to the ME before and no i wouldn't live there

testaccount123 · 05-06-2017 02:42PM

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Idiotic post is idiotic

It does show that you have nonisea though, few I've been to the ME before and no i wouldn't live there

Me neither, unfortunately it seems to be coming to us.

Roger Hassenforder · 05-06-2017 02:42PM

neverever1 wrote: »

So the west killing hundreds of thousands of innocent Muslims has nothing at all to do with radicalised Muslims attacking? innocent westerners?

FYP - interesting selective use of the word "innocent".
there's almost a suggestion in your anti Brit bile these people had it coming.

if the perps were family members of Iraqis, Syrians or Yemeni families wiped out in drone strikes, and were out for vengeance, than fair enough, you might have a point.
but they're in the main, beneficiaries of a generous Western society, who take it on themselves to (as you claim) "avenge" Muslims in far off countries , conveniently omitting that the very ideology they're espousing is slaughtering fellow Muslims in their 1000s

gitzy16v · 05-06-2017 02:43PM

neverever1 wrote: »

I haven't said that these murderers aren't brainwashed by the preachers etc who feed them these fantasies about religion. I'm saying that no one can be radicalised without the bombing campaigns. It simply would not happen and these extreme groups would be tiny and irrelevant.

Do you just ignore what ISIS themselves say?
They say its to spread Islam and fcuk all to do with bombing..
If the bombing stopped tomorrow ISIS would still carry on attacking in the name of Islam

ilkhanid · 05-06-2017 02:44PM

neverever1 wrote: »

Why aren't there British marches and demonstrations against the murder by their forces of innocents in the Middle East? It should be happening every day shouldn't it? Or do British people support the murder of innocents?
The same thing can be said about British people not protesting as about Muslims.

The difference is that British forces aren't intentionally killing innocents.
They are fighting IS and innocent people are killed in the fighting. Now if you can come up with a solution to a problem that has plagued humanity since 6000BC-how to destroy the enemy while making sure no innocents are killed-i'm sure the world would love to hear it.

neverever1 wrote: »

How many British people are out condemning the murder of innocent Middle Eastern people? Do they support dropping bombs on these countries?

Ditto

neverever1 wrote: »

I'm saying that no one can be radicalised without the bombing campaigns. It simply would not happen and these extreme groups would be tiny and irrelevant.

the GIA in Algeria were radicalised without one bomb falling on Algeria. They were radicalised enough to murder 100 000 (there are higher estimates) people:men, women, infants.....

neverever1 wrote: »

Where's their protests? Isn't the lack of protests proof that they support the murder of innocents?
Sweden provided support to armies that have attacked the Middle East. Developing weapons for them.

Sweden has forces in Iraqi Kurdistan, helping to fight IS. Note the distinction?

namloc1980 · 05-06-2017 02:44PM

neverever1 wrote: »

I haven't said that these murderers aren't brainwashed by the preachers etc who feed them these fantasies about religion. I'm saying that no one can be radicalised without the bombing campaigns. It simply would not happen and these extreme groups would be tiny and irrelevant.

So how do you explain the Moroccan who was involved? No bombing in Morocco. Or the Uzbek in Sweden? No bombing in Uzbekistan. Or the Tunisian in Nice? No bombing in Tunisia. Or that 15 of the 9/11 attackers were Saudis? No bombing in Saudi Arabia. I'll wait for the explanation.

Help!!!! · 05-06-2017 02:48PM

namloc1980 wrote: »

So how do you explain the Moroccan who was involved? No bombing in Morocco. Or the Uzbek in Sweden? No bombing in Uzbekistan. Or the Tunisian in Nice? No bombing in Tunisia. Or that 15 of the 9/11 attackers were Saudis? No bombing in Saudi Arabia. I'll wait for the explanation.

Its nothing to do with the Quran or Islam, it just isn't I tell you. Its the Brits, bombing, M.E. & those Americans no not Islam all to do with the M.E. the Brits the Brits & Americans & the bombs

Richard Hillman · 05-06-2017 02:49PM

Gonna be serious discussions this week about our terror harbouring. I can see it on Claire Byrne Live or Primetime

Featuring:
Some weakling from the government to tell us they are doing EVERYTHING, the problem is small.

Colm O'Gorman, to tell us that there is no problem at all. Doing actual things means the terrorists win

An Audience full of PBP/AAA members to call everybody racists.

Its going to be totally explosive TV and totally unpredictable.

jmayo · 05-06-2017 02:49PM

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Not "fabricating"!

The "protest" was in support for the victims, they were moved into position to.show the street where the attacks took place or do you think the backdrop for the shot should have been a drab grey building?

It's not much of a protest when you can move them around on a street to get the optimum picture. :rolleyes:

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

A muslim is a Muslim Same as a Christian who believes in creation and thinks the world is only 6000 years old is as much of a Christian as one who believes in evolution and that the earth is billions of years old.

WTF are you on about.
Just like with christians there are various flavours of islam.
And lumping them all together is stupid, doesn't recognise the differences and gulfs between them and is considered insulting to them actually.

It is your type of narrow minded thinking that helped create the mess in Iraq post sadam.
According to US and British leaders they just saw them all as Iraqis and that the majority of them hated sadam.
Once he was out of the way they would all just "live in the light" to paraphrase another poster. :rolleyes:

Except they hate each other, are tribalistic and can't wait to go slaughtering each other given the chance.
Hence you had shias getting even for being under the yoke of sadam's sunnis for decades.
You then ended up with sunnis turning to the likes of al-Qaeda in Iraq which in turn morphed into ISIS.
Once they got ground they started slaughtering Shias, Kurds, Yazidis, Alawites, etc.

Just ask ISIS or even most of those adhering to Wahhabist sunni islam about who is an isn't a muslim in their eyes.

Trump_Wall · 05-06-2017 02:51PM

neverever1 wrote: »

We can talk about the history of Christianity as well but it has nothing to do with this modern situation. The fact is that if the West had not flattened many Middle Eastern countries for the past century then these groups like Isis would be minuscule and very easy to control.

So when ISIS claim that they would exist independent of Western foreign policy and that their purpose is theocratic in origin, you're saying they're lying to us and you really know their true purpose?

That's quite a claim.

Since when did they appoint you as their official spokesperson?

volchitsa · 05-06-2017 02:52PM

ilkhanid wrote: »

The difference is that British forces aren't intentionally killing innocents.
They are fighting IS and innocent people are killed in the fighting. Now if you can come up with a solution to a problem that has plagued humanity since 6000BC-how to destroy the enemy while making sure no innocents are killed-i'm sure the world would love to hear it.

Ditto

The other poster appears not to have heard of the "Not in my name" movement.
Has there been anything similar from Sunni Musloms in the UK?

(I know the Ahmaddiyya (sp?) have marched, but as they aren't considered Muslims by the vast majority of Muslims around the world, we can hardly consider that they speak for those Muslims who reject them.)

neverever1 · 05-06-2017 02:52PM

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

FYP - interesting selective use of the word "innocent".
there's almost a suggestion in your anti Brit bile these people had it coming.

if the perps were family members of Iraqis, Syrians or Yemeni families wiped out in drone strikes, and were out for vengeance, than fair enough, you might have a point.
but they're in the main, beneficiaries of a generous Western society, who take it on themselves to (as you claim) "avenge" Muslims in far off countries , conveniently omitting that the very ideology they're espousing is slaughtering fellow Muslims in their 1000s

So being against British/American bombing campaigns is anti Brit bile? I could ask you do you think the innocents killed by British bombs had it coming?
In most cases the reason these people are even in Western societies is because of the bombing campaigns.

Help!!!! · 05-06-2017 02:52PM

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Gonna be serious discussions this week about our terror harbouring. I can see it on Claire Byrne Live or Primetime

Featuring:
Some weakling from the government to tell us they are doing EVERYTHING, the problem is small.

Colm O'Gorman, to tell us that there is no problem at all. Doing actual things means the terrorists win

An Audience full of PBP/AAA members to call everybody racists.

Its going to be totally explosive TV and totally unpredictable.

& Liam Cunningham to tell us its our duty to take in more refugees

DeanAustin · 05-06-2017 02:52PM

namloc1980 wrote: »

So how do you explain the Moroccan who was involved? No bombing in Morocco. Or the Uzbek in Sweden? No bombing in Uzbekistan. Or the Tunisian in Nice? No bombing in Tunisia. Or that 15 of the 9/11 attackers were Saudis? No bombing in Saudi Arabia. I'll wait for the explanation.

You're being disingenuous now. What binds these fundamentalists together is their faith, not their nationality and Muslims see the Western interference in the Middle East as an affront to their religion.

I also cringe at the "they aren't Muslims" rhetoric some people are spouting. They're so wrapped up in their faith that they're laying down their lives for what they believe in. They're Muslims, like it or not.

Trump_Wall · 05-06-2017 02:53PM

neverever1 wrote: »

So being against British/American bombing campaigns is anti Brit bile? I could ask you do you think the innocents killed by British bombs had it coming?
In most cases the reason these people are even in Western societies is because of the bombing campaigns.

So they hate us so much that they've decided to live among us?

neverever1 · 05-06-2017 02:55PM

gitzy16v wrote: »

Do you just ignore what ISIS themselves say?
They say its to spread Islam and fcuk all to do with bombing..
If the bombing stopped tomorrow ISIS would still carry on attacking in the name of Islam

Do you believe everything isis says? Groups like Isis would be minuscule without the bombs, this is a fact.

wakka12 · 05-06-2017 02:55PM

neverever1 wrote: »

I haven't said that these murderers aren't brainwashed by the preachers etc who feed them these fantasies about religion. I'm saying that no one can be radicalised without the bombing campaigns. It simply would not happen and these extreme groups would be tiny and irrelevant.

Actually you have.
I once said that the arianna grande concert could have easily been targeted due to its patrons being young sexually confident girls which ISIS demonise.
And you said much more likely the bombing occurred because the attacker felt revenge was needed for whats happening in Middle east by western forces.
As Ive said before, you keep trying to dignify animals, for what reason I don't know.

volchitsa · 05-06-2017 02:55PM

DeanAustin wrote: »

You're being disingenuous now. What binds these fundamentalists together is their faith, not their nationality and Muslims see the Western interference in the Middle East as an affront to their religion.

Funny enough they don't mind killing each other though. Look at the bombs planted in Iraq and Afghanistan in the last few days. A bit like the domestic violence scenario where the outsider stepping in to help is then turned on by all sides perhaps?

Will I Am Not · 05-06-2017 02:58PM

neverever1 wrote: »

Do you believe everything isis says? Groups like Isis would be minuscule without the bombs, this is a fact.

Do you not think that they might actually have the support of Westerners if they just came out and said "stop bombing us and we'll stop killing your civilians"

These are the people behind these atrocities and they are telling us why but you want to just ignore that because you can't pin the blame on white Europeans?

London terror attack confirmed by Met Police

Comments