Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.

London terror attack confirmed by Met Police

1…8081838586…114

Comments

  • #2462
    Really Interested
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,554 Really Interested
    ✭✭✭


    Hank Scorpio wrote: »
    The arms deal with them is awful, so is the fact that they're allies with the US. There's no defending that situation. One could argue he gave a speech about rooting out extremism over there, but it falls far short given the relationship the Saudis have with the US.

    His previous statements mean nothing if he is not going to repeat them to the people who have bought and paid for the terror.

    He is just like all the rest except he is dangerous through being stupid.


  • #2463
    Really Interested
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,554 Really Interested
    ✭✭✭


    The_Kew_Tour wrote: »
    Having been to Saudi Arabia and how they treat some of their Citizens is nothing short of disgrace.

    And now America is in bed with them.

    Knife to back stuff

    The Americans have been taking Saudi Richard since before Nixon.


  • #2464
    The_Kew_Tour
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 35,169 The_Kew_Tour
    ✭✭✭✭


    Really Interested wrote: »
    The Americans have been taking Saudi Richard since before Nixon.

    They have but that should have changed in 2001 without question

    EVENFLOW



  • #2465
    Hank Scorpio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,631 Hank Scorpio
    ✭✭✭✭


    Really Interested wrote: »
    His previous statements mean nothing if he is not going to repeat them to the people who have bought and paid for the terror.

    He is just like all the rest except he is dangerous through being stupid.

    If you believe Trump has the power to cut ties with the Saudis then maybe you're the one being stupid.


  • #2466
    Really Interested
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,554 Really Interested
    ✭✭✭


    The_Kew_Tour wrote: »
    They have but that should have changed in 2001 without question

    Have you looked at the verified Bush Bin Laden links.


  • Advertisement
  • #2467
    The_Kew_Tour
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 35,169 The_Kew_Tour
    ✭✭✭✭


    Hank Scorpio wrote: »
    If you believe Trump has the power to cut ties with the Saudis then maybe you're the one being stupid.

    Good point.

    But he is The President. Yes, I know its not really him, but he still the head guy.

    They have to accept that when in power.

    But I do accept your point and agree

    EVENFLOW



  • #2468
    volchitsa
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,282 volchitsa
    ✭✭✭✭


    Hank Scorpio wrote: »
    If you believe Trump has the power to cut ties with the Saudis then maybe you're the one being stupid.

    So what does it matter if he talks about Islamists if he's pointing the finger the wrong way out of self interest? That's worse than saying nothing.

    "If a woman cannot stand in a public space and say, without fear of consequences, that men cannot be women, then women have no rights at all." Helen Joyce



  • #2469
    The_Kew_Tour
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 35,169 The_Kew_Tour
    ✭✭✭✭


    Really Interested wrote: »
    Have you looked at the verified Bush Bin Laden links.

    Are you talking about Bush and Bin Ladens brother as Business Partners?

    EVENFLOW



  • #2470
    Really Interested
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,554 Really Interested
    ✭✭✭


    Hank Scorpio wrote: »
    If you believe Trump has the power to cut ties with the Saudis then maybe you're the one being stupid.

    But why did he not say radical Islam in Saudi. He could have stoped the sale of weapons. He could have called out the Royal family like he called out the leaders of NATO or the G7.


  • #2471
    Really Interested
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,554 Really Interested
    ✭✭✭


    The_Kew_Tour wrote: »
    Are you talking about Bush and Bin Ladens brother as Business Partners?

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/bin-laden-family-members-evacuated-from-us-in-wake-of-the-9-11-attacks/15186

    The GOP and big oil will do anything the Kingdom wants. I. Suppose licking Saudi ass will make America great again.


  • Advertisement
  • #2472
    Hank Scorpio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,631 Hank Scorpio
    ✭✭✭✭


    Really Interested wrote: »
    But why did he not say radical Islam in Saudi. He could have stoped the sale of weapons. He could have called the Royal family like he called out the leaders of NATO or the G7.

    He probably values keeping his head attached to his body.



  • #2473
    Really Interested
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,554 Really Interested
    ✭✭✭


    The_Kew_Tour wrote: »
    Good point.

    But he is The President. Yes, I know its not really him, but he still the head guy.

    They have to accept that when in power.

    But I do accept your point and agree

    So why is it not ok for Khan to have used Radical Islam but it's ok for Trump not to use it in Saudi. It was ok for him to say what he felt to US allies including an attack on Khan while his city was under attack.


  • #2474
    Dyr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,246 Dyr
    ✭✭✭✭


    The Funny thing about these Jihad Johnnies is that they're not very low key are they?

    Ordinary Daycent Muslims ringing up hotlines about these buckos would suggest that they're not keeping their heads down like some kind of Sleeper cell.


  • #2475
    Really Interested
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,554 Really Interested
    ✭✭✭


    Hank Scorpio wrote: »
    He probably values keeping his head attached to his body.


    Ok so it ok not to use Radical Islam? Cool I hope it is never thrown at any politician again.


  • #2476
    DrWu
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 250 DrWu
    ✭✭


    Totally off topic non-IRA stuff, but no-one gives a sh!t right?


  • #2477
    The_Kew_Tour
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 35,169 The_Kew_Tour
    ✭✭✭✭


    Really Interested wrote: »
    So why is it not ok for Khan to have used Radical Islam but it's ok for Trump not to use it in Saudi. It was ok for him to say what he felt to US allies including an attack on Khan while his city was under attack.

    Better to ask someone who does not agree with your statement.

    EVENFLOW



  • #2478
    The_Kew_Tour
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 35,169 The_Kew_Tour
    ✭✭✭✭


    Bambi wrote: »
    The Funny thing about these Jihad Johnnies is that they're not very low key are they?

    Ordinary Daycent Muslims ringing up hotlines about these buckos would suggest that they're not keeping their heads down like some kind of Sleeper cell.

    True

    And putting a ISIS flag on display in Publi Park like one of attackers did

    Im Not a Terrorist but....

    EVENFLOW



  • #2479
    Biggest lickspittle on boardz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 558 Biggest lickspittle on boardz
    ✭✭✭


    Hande hoche! wrote: »
    On the plus side it seems like the SDF's attack on Raqqa has commenced.


    Looks like that'll be the end of John Cantlie so, if he isn't already dead. I can't imagine ISIS letting him go or trading him in exchange for mercy.


  • #2480
    Really Interested
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,554 Really Interested
    ✭✭✭


    Bambi wrote: »
    The Funny thing about these Jihad Johnnies is that they're not very low key are they?

    Ordinary Daycent Muslims ringing up hotlines about these buckos would suggest that they're not keeping their heads down like some kind of Sleeper cell.

    That's what's interesting one of the attackers I believe was on a TV show about it.

    From my understanding the Liverpool gob****e, his mother and Iman worried enough to ring the hot line.

    I believe a number of people had also done it in relation to the London muppets.


  • #2481
    Really Interested
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,554 Really Interested
    ✭✭✭


    The_Kew_Tour wrote: »
    Better to ask someone who does not agree with your statement.

    So we all agree. At least we can put the he did not say stuff where it belongs.


  • Advertisement
  • #2482
    Hank Scorpio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,631 Hank Scorpio
    ✭✭✭✭


    Really Interested wrote: »
    Ok so it ok not to use Radical Islam? Cool I hope it is never thrown at any politician again.

    "That means honestly confronting the crisis of Islamic extremism, and the Islamists and Islamic terror of all kinds"

    He left out the word radical, stop the press.


  • #2483
    The_Kew_Tour
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 35,169 The_Kew_Tour
    ✭✭✭✭


    Really Interested wrote: »
    So we all agree. At least we can put the he did not say stuff where it belongs.

    On the topic you mentioned between Trump and Kahn

    EVENFLOW



  • #2484
    Really Interested
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,554 Really Interested
    ✭✭✭


    The_Kew_Tour wrote: »
    True

    And putting a ISIS flag on display in Publi Park like one of attackers did

    Im Not a Terrorist but....

    I saw that. As far as I know it may be a criminal offence in UK (open to correction) The camera crew had evidence of same it was broadcast, was there a case? The guy went on to kill people.


  • #2485
    The_Kew_Tour
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 35,169 The_Kew_Tour
    ✭✭✭✭


    Really Interested wrote: »
    I saw that. As far as I know it may be a criminal offence in UK (open to correction) The camera crew had evidence of same it was broadcast, was there a case? The guy went on to kill people.

    Not sure, dont think there was, but im open for correction

    EVENFLOW



  • #2486
    Call me Al
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,041 Call me Al
    ✭✭✭


    Biggest lickspittle on boardz wrote: »
    There's only so much the Security Services can do. There are at least 23,000 Islamic extremists in the UK. Even will all the big data, surveillance programmes, and CCTV, it still take manpower to investigate each individual and their potential links. Some might be benign, or in a 'sleeper' mode. Others are highly active and immediate threats. For the immediate threats, that means 24/7 surveillance by trained, experienced officers.

    And it takes roughly 50 officers in a rolling capacity around the clock to monitor ONE SINGLE SUSPECT. :eek:

    The bottom line is the the UK is swamped, utterly swamped with potential threats. Which is why I fear this is going to end in sectarian attacks somewhere down the line.
    Have you any articles explaining how the security services have concluded that 23000 people are extremists?
    I'd have thought that a person, and his immediate circle of acquaintances (one of whom allegedly participated in a beheading in Syria) who was brave and brazen enough to go so far as to unfurl and pray at an IS flag in a London park should be under supervision.
    Unless they feel they've more radicalized people of interest than this to watch in which case the security services in the UK have a really major problem on their hands.


  • #2487
    Phoebas
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,371 Phoebas
    ✭✭✭


    Bambi wrote: »
    The Funny thing about these Jihad Johnnies is that they're not very low key are they?

    Ordinary Daycent Muslims ringing up hotlines about these buckos would suggest that they're not keeping their heads down like some kind of Sleeper cell.
    Given that one of them appeared in a documentary, I'd say not.
    Back in the day around here, you knew the guys who weren't involved in anything significant, because they were the ones mouthing off down the pub.

    These lads seem to play it differently. You'd think making it easy for the cops like that would make a difference.


  • #2488
    Really Interested
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,554 Really Interested
    ✭✭✭


    Hank Scorpio wrote: »
    "That means honestly confronting the crisis of Islamic extremism, and the Islamists and Islamic terror of all kinds"

    He left out the word radical, stop the press.

    Khan uses very strong words to attack terror muppets, https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.romper.com/p/sadiq-khans-statement-about-islam-the-london-attack-is-so-important-62272/amp yet he will be attacked that he did not use "Radical Islam"

    I'm happy for any one be it Trump or Khan or May in fact anyone to call out the terror bums but let's not get caught up with did they use buzz words.


  • #2489
    Really Interested
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,554 Really Interested
    ✭✭✭


    The_Kew_Tour wrote: »
    Not sure, dont think there was, but im open for correction

    That's my exact point. The UK has some very strong terror laws (not having a written constitution and all that) many of the very strong laws have been upheld by the UKSC the ECHR and where it had power the European Court of Justice. Yet they seem to not go for slam dunk cases.


  • #2490
    silverharp
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,853 silverharp
    ✭✭✭✭


    from the spectator

    https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/06/donald-trumps-tweets-sadiq-khan-might-unacceptable-theyre-not-futile/#
    The most shocking thing about Donald Trump’s Sadiq Khan tweet? He’s right

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Advertisement
  • #2491
    The_Kew_Tour
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 35,169 The_Kew_Tour
    ✭✭✭✭


    Really Interested wrote: »
    That's my exact point. The UK has some very strong terror laws (not having a written constitution and all that) many of the very strong laws have been upheld by the UKSC the ECHR and where it had power the European Court of Justice. Yet they seem to not go for slam dunk cases.

    People should not be surprised

    EVENFLOW



Welcome!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.
Sign In
Register
Advertisement