Five dead, at least 40 injured in UK parliament 'terrorist' attack

[transam]

8 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

 

Indeed.

 

Certain people say that all Muslims must at least support the terrorists because they never speak out or demonstrate against them.

 

When shown that in fact Muslims do speak out and demonstrate against terrorism; often, vociferously and in large numbers, then these same people say that they are

• lying to deceive as all as to their true intentions,
• the wrong type of Muslim (despite also saying that all Muslims are 'evil' as their holy book tells them to be so) or
• manipulating the leftist media!

Think YOU are the one purporting all Muslims are perfect citizens...

[7by7]

23 minutes ago, transam said:

Think YOU are the one purporting all Muslims are perfect citizens...

Then you think wrongly.

 

I have never said anything like that.

[simple1]

1 hour ago, transam said:

Think YOU are the one purporting all Muslims are perfect citizens...

You're taking the mickey. 7x7 has never made such a comment

[transam]

51 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

Then you think wrongly.

 

I have never said anything like that.

Really...Have YOU ever called Transam a racist because he don't like Muslims chopping off heads.....?

[CharlieH]

TIME - OUT ! 

 

Lets not make this personal please.

[katana]

18 hours ago, swbaggies said:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/women-gather-form-human-chain-10105637

Quote from article:

"...[ Fariha Khan] was joined by fellow Ahmadiyya muslims who said they wanted to add to the condemnation of the violent attack and stand defiant in the face of terrorism...."

 

These 12 muslim women showing solidarity against the attack by linking hands on the bridge are part of a peaceful minority sect of Islam, the Ahmadiyya muslims, persecuted and hated by the mainstream majority of Muslims.
You may remember last year, Scottish shopkeeper Asad Shah was stabbed to death by Sunni muslim Tanveer Ahmed.
Ahmed, 32, confessed to confronting and then attacking Shah in his Glasgow newsagents' shop because Shah was an open adherent of the Ahmadiyya branch of Islam, which believes the prophet Muhammad was not the final Muslim prophet.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/aug/09/tanveer-ahmed-jailed-for-murder-glasgow-shopkeeper-in-sectarian-attack

 

[7by7]

Muslim leaders hold peace rally in wake of Westminster terror attack

Quote

Muslim faith leaders have led a peace rally in Birmingham following the Westminster terror attack.

More than 200 people turned out in Victoria Square, holding banners that read “Not in our name - Muslims oppose Isis”, in an event organised by Birmingham Central Mosque.

 

[brewsterbudgen]

Hopefully the last two posts from 7by7 and katana have put this argument to bed!

[sotsira]

Interesting to hear Katie Hopkins view on the Westminster Terrorist attack.

 

 

[Kwasaki]

On 3/28/2017 at 8:01 AM, brewsterbudgen said:

Hopefully the last two posts from 7by7 and katana have put this argument to bed!

Why should it how many Shia muslins were amongst them. ?

 

Ahmadi Muslims agree with both Shia and Sunni sects on the essential details for the performance of these acts. However, in Pakistan Ahmadi Muslims are prohibited by law, and to some extent in other Muslim countries by persecution, from self-identifying as Muslims.

[Kwasaki]

16 hours ago, sotsira said:

Interesting to hear Katie Hopkins view on the Westminster Terrorist attack.

 

 

Good stuff Briton needs more out-spoken people like this before there is civil clashes,  how to stop breeding is another problem.

If it were possible to make compulsory conscription into one of the UK armed forces for men & women made law just see the mass exodus.

[brewsterbudgen]

Good stuff Briton needs more out-spoken people like this before there is civil clashes,  how to stop breeding is another problem.
If it were possible to make compulsory conscription into one of the UK armed forces for men & women made law just see the mass exodus.

It's a shame Katie Hopkins' parents were allowed to breed...[emoji54]

[dick dasterdly]

19 hours ago, sotsira said:

Interesting to hear Katie Hopkins view on the Westminster Terrorist attack.

 

 

The name Katie Hopkins meant nothing to me, but a quick google search reveals that she was on 'The Apprentice'.

 

Nonetheless, I listened to the first few seconds of this link - which was all it took to realise she was just someone else with an opinion....

 

But perhaps I'm wrong and she came out with some interesting points?  If so, please list them rather than assuming anyone cares about the opinions of someone with a vague claim to being a 'celebrity'....

[Rajab Al Zarahni]

She is distinguished by her tactless, insensitive  and undiplomatic opinions. These are seen as her distinguishing attributes by her supporters, and as a reason to despise her by the rest. 

She is the ultimate anti- celebrity

Edited April 5, 2017 by Rajab Al Zarahni

[dick dasterdly]

Just now, Rajab Al Zarahni said:

She is distinguished by her tactless, insensitive  and undiplomatic opinions. These are seen as her distinguishing attributes by her supporters, and as a reason to despise her by the rest. 

Not really.  At least a few of us (I suspect) didn't have the slightest idea who she is and only took a (very) slight interest as a clip was posted indicating that she was someone with an opinion worthy of respect !

[PREM-R]

Quote referring to Katie Hopkins

 

16 minutes ago, Rajab Al Zarahni said:

She is distinguished by her tactless, insensitive  and undiplomatic opinions. These are seen as her distinguishing attributes by her supporters, and as a reason to despise her by the rest. 

She is the ultimate anti- celebrity

"She is distinguished by her tactless, insensitive  and undiplomatic opinions"

 

 She should join TVF, she'd fit right in.

[dick dasterdly]

1 hour ago, PREM-R said:

Quote referring to Katie Hopkins

 

"She is distinguished by her tactless, insensitive  and undiplomatic opinions"

 

 She should join TVF, she'd fit right in.

To be fair, I appreciate undiplomatic opinions on TVF and generally only get annoyed when the posters' 'opinion' is based on insults against those with a different opinion.

[rockingrobin]

1 hour ago, PREM-R said:

Quote referring to Katie Hopkins

 

"She is distinguished by her tactless, insensitive  and undiplomatic opinions"

 

 She should join TVF, she'd fit right in.

Did K.Hopkins propose that ice cream vans could be used for old people euthanasia  because there was to many of them

Edited April 5, 2017 by rockingrobin

[roo860]

Did K.Hopkins propose that ice cream vans could be used for old people euthanasia  because there was to many of them

Too many ice cream vans?

Sent from my SM-G920F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[7by7]

4 hours ago, Kwasaki said:

Good stuff Briton needs more out-spoken people like this before there is civil clashes,  how to stop breeding is another problem.........

 

Katie Hopkins opinions includes not letting her children play with other children whose parents she considers to be her social inferiors. One of the ways she judges other parents to be her inferiors is by the names they give their children; especially if they name their children after places. This is despite one of her daughters being named India!

 

In the interview she criticises Londoners for saying that they are not afraid, wont be cowed by terrorists; the same attitude they showed during the Blitz and the IRA attacks in fact. Why is that a bad thing?

 

She goes on to say that people outside London are afraid, are cowed. If she truly believes that, she does not know the British at all!

 

She goes on to lambast the mayor, Sadiq Khan, for saying "we expect this sort of thing to happen" going on to suggest this, and vigils in remembrance of the victims, is pretending it is ok.

 

Although she doesn't say so, she is obviously referring to a statement Khan made in September 2016

Quote

Sadiq Khan has said he believes the threat of terror attacks are “part and parcel of living in a big city” and encouraged Londoners to be vigilant to combat dangers.

The Mayor of London revealed he had a “sleepless night” after the recent bombing in New York, and said major cities around the world “have got to be prepared for these sorts of things” to happen when people least expect them.

“That means being vigilant, having a police force that is in touch with communities, it means the security services being ready, but it also means exchanging ideas and best practice”, Mr Khan told the Evening Standard shortly before a meeting with New York mayor Bill de Blasio...........

 

“Nothing is more important to me than keeping Londoners safe,” Mr Khan said at the time. “I want to be reassured that every single agency and individual involved in protecting our city has the resources and expertise they need to respond in the event that London is attacked.” 

 

“The terrorists are evolving their tactics and we have got to evolve our response to them all the time. I am afraid the consequences of a terror attack are very very scary. They want to kill. They want to maim and terrify. It is my job to try to make sure that we are as safe as we can be.” (source)

 What does Hopkins and those who agree with her expect the Mayor of London to have said instead?  "Everything's all right; it won't happen here?"

 

In the minds of people like Hopkins, Khan is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't; and there is just one reason for that; his religion.

[dick dasterdly]

Can we please give up on Katie Hopkins?!

 

She's a VERY minor celebrity whose opinion is worth no more than any other Tom, Dick or Harry!

 

Arguing against other posters is worthwhile.  Arguing against some wannabee celeb is not.

[Kwasaki]

1 hour ago, 7by7 said:

 

Katie Hopkins opinions includes not letting her children play with other children whose parents she considers to be her social inferiors. One of the ways she judges other parents to be her inferiors is by the names they give their children; especially if they name their children after places. This is despite one of her daughters being named India!

 

In the interview she criticises Londoners for saying that they are not afraid, wont be cowed by terrorists; the same attitude they showed during the Blitz and the IRA attacks in fact. Why is that a bad thing?

 

She goes on to say that people outside London are afraid, are cowed. If she truly believes that, she does not know the British at all!

 

She goes on to lambast the mayor, Sadiq Khan, for saying "we expect this sort of thing to happen" going on to suggest this, and vigils in remembrance of the victims, is pretending it is ok.

 

Although she doesn't say so, she is obviously referring to a statement Khan made in September 2016

 What does Hopkins and those who agree with her expect the Mayor of London to have said instead?  "Everything's all right; it won't happen here?"

 

In the minds of people like Hopkins, Khan is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't; and there is just one reason for that; his religion.

Look OK you and me are " Kepela " l don't think we could ever agree,  l dislike all religions and muslim sectors but l hate Sharia muslin and l am not alone.

So lets just call it day, you like muslims and l don't, so end of.

 

[7by7]

6 hours ago, Kwasaki said:

On ‎28‎/‎03‎/‎2017 at 2:01 AM, brewsterbudgen said:

Hopefully the last two posts from 7by7 and katana have put this argument to bed!

Why should it how many Shia muslins were amongst them. ?

 ISIS are Sunni, not Shia.

 

Sunnis do condemn ISIS and other Islamic terrorists. How 70,000 Muslim Clerics Are Standing Up To Terrorism

Quote

Almost 70,000 Muslim clerics have come together to pass a fatwa against global terrorist organizations, including the Taliban, al Qaeda and the militant group that calls itself the Islamic State.

During an annual gathering of South Asian Sunni Muslims in the Indian state of Uttar Pradesh this week, almost 1.5 million attendees signed a document protesting global terrorist activity, according to The Times of India.

 

As do Shias.Isis concern: British Muslim leaders condemn extremist group

Quote

Representatives from both the Sunni and Shia groups in the UK met at the Palace of Westminster and relayed their message that the militant group does not represent the majority of Muslims.

 

Muslim Leaders Worldwide Condemn ISIS

Quote

Vatican Radio – an official Vatican news site – reported last month:

Two of the leading voices in the Muslim world denounced the persecution of Christians in Iraq, at the hands of extremists proclaiming a caliphate under the name Islamic State.

The most explicit condemnation came from Iyad Ameen Madani, the Secretary General for the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, the group representing 57 countries, and 1.4 billion Muslims.

Whenever people here show that Muslims do condemn the terrorists, people like you respond by saying that it is only Ahmadi Muslims who of do so.

 

The above, and the many more examples out there for those who care to look, shows this to be incorrect.

 

Do you know accept that Muslims worldwide, of all sects, do condemn the terrorists?

[7by7]

24 minutes ago, Kwasaki said:

Look OK you and me are " Kepela " l don't think we could ever agree,  l dislike all religions and muslim sectors but l hate Sharia muslin and l am not alone.

So lets just call it day, you like muslims and l don't, so end of.

 

I am not religious; but have no dislike for any religion or it's followers. I believe the freedom which allows me to follow no religion applies equally to those who do choose to follow one.

 

I like to think I hate no one; but I do certainly dislike people who try to force their views on me. Whether it be the tiny minority of Muslims who call for Sharia law in certain areas of the UK, the Christians who try and convert me every weekend in my local town centre or anyone else.

 

Do I like all Muslims? Not especially. I do have Muslim friends, just as I have friends who follow other religions or none. But I also have Muslim acquaintances who I consider to be pillocks of the first order.

 

I had to look up the meaning of 'Kepela.' The closest seems to be 'chalk and cheese.' You're probably right; because I base my opinions on facts, whereas you seem to base yours on prejudice.

[yogi100]

22 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 

Katie Hopkins opinions includes not letting her children play with other children whose parents she considers to be her social inferiors. One of the ways she judges other parents to be her inferiors is by the names they give their children; especially if they name their children after places. This is despite one of her daughters being named India!

 

In the interview she criticises Londoners for saying that they are not afraid, wont be cowed by terrorists; the same attitude they showed during the Blitz and the IRA attacks in fact. Why is that a bad thing?

 

She goes on to say that people outside London are afraid, are cowed. If she truly believes that, she does not know the British at all!

 

She goes on to lambast the mayor, Sadiq Khan, for saying "we expect this sort of thing to happen" going on to suggest this, and vigils in remembrance of the victims, is pretending it is ok.

 

Although she doesn't say so, she is obviously referring to a statement Khan made in September 2016

 What does Hopkins and those who agree with her expect the Mayor of London to have said instead?  "Everything's all right; it won't happen here?"

 

In the minds of people like Hopkins, Khan is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't; and there is just one reason for that; his religion.

 

Of course the people were afraid. Why do you think one lady was so terrified she jumped off the bridge into the River Thames.

If a car came tearing along the pavement in your direction knocking people over like skittles you'd also be terrified, so would I and so would anyone on this forum reading this topic..

 

It's all very brave to say you're not frightened when it's all over especially if you weren't there or if you've never had such an experience.

[englishoak]

53 minutes ago, yogi100 said:

 

Of course the people were afraid. Why do you think one lady was so terrified she jumped off the bridge into the River Thames.

If a car came tearing along the pavement in your direction knocking people over like skittles you'd also be terrified, so would I and so would anyone on this forum reading this topic..

 

It's all very brave to say you're not frightened when it's all over especially if you weren't there or if you've never had such an experience.

 

Rubbish, the lady was knocked into the river by the car for starters. Also most people get out the way of things coming towards automatically without terror, its called instinct and self preservation, you dont have time to think just react, been there done that in Thailand rather than be crushed by a car mounting a pavement in Ranong, no terror just reacted.

 

Remember there was no attack like a bomb etc it was just a car on the pavement rather than the road until it was over  with, it all happened in 82 seconds, its really nothing more than a bad auto accident can be,  the scumbag driver was dead within moments, mostly  people on scene immediately tried to help, thats courage not terror... 

 

The idea people are "terrified" is 99%  BS propaganda served up by our media and the BBC etc. I know there is indeed an element of mugs that take all the BS in and suitably pretend top be scared but that is how some of the brainwashed public act when all the media is ramming it down peoples throats 

 

London is especially used to attacks throughout the past 40 years thanks to the IRA and later  Islamic attacks. 

 

The only ones terrified will be the snowflakes, middle class women and the media encouraging fear and does no one any favours. There is plenty to be disgusted and angry about but little to be scared of in the UK and overwhelmingly most people are the former rather than latter... dont believe the BS the media tells you.

 

Now if I lived in Mosul et al then there might be more call to use the word scared but again terrified would still be too strong a word,  when an incident occurs yes it can induce terror and panic but nobody walks around terrified all day, its just not possible to get on with life in such a  state.

Hopkins is basically correct, we dont sweat this kind of thing too much and Londoners especially, the vast majority of British people arnt  wilting wallflowers the media would like to pretend or wish.I cant speak for the younger snowflakes these days who love to pretend drama and offence but thats a different topic.

Edited April 6, 2017 by englishoak

[theoldgit]

Highly offensive and callous remark deleted, people lost their lives please show some decency. 

[7by7]

4 hours ago, yogi100 said:

 

Of course the people were afraid. Why do you think one lady was so terrified she jumped off the bridge into the River Thames.

If a car came tearing along the pavement in your direction knocking people over like skittles you'd also be terrified, so would I and so would anyone on this forum reading this topic..

 

It's all very brave to say you're not frightened when it's all over especially if you weren't there or if you've never had such an experience.

 You seem to have missed my point.

 

Of course anyone would be terrified and panicky if a car was hurtling towards them at high speed; whether that car was driven by a drunk, a terrorists or had simply gone out of control.

 

But Hopkins was trying to convince her American audience that the people of Britain are living in a constant state of fear; which we are not.

 

We didn't during the Blitz, we didn't during the IRA campaign; we won't let these scumbags effect us in that way either.

 

Vigilance and caution, of course; fear; never.

 

I have had some near misses. 

 

Friends of mine were in the Horse and Groom on 5th October 1974 when the IRA bomb went off; I'd have been there with them had my train not been late. Did it make me afraid to go into a pub? Of course not.

 

I was travelling on the Tube on the morning of 7th July 2005. Did I stop travelling on the Tube after those attacks? No, of course not.

 

Not terrorist related, but on the morning of 12th December 1988 I was slightly early and so caught the train to Waterloo  before my usual one. My usual train was the one involved in the Clapham crash. Did that make me afraid to travel by train. Of course not.

 

These near misses may have made you afraid; but not me. I don't know your nationality, but I can assure you that we British are made of sterner stuff.

 

The Luftwaffe didn't destroy our spirit, the IRA didn't destroy our spirit, and these Islamist terrorists wont either.

[stevenl]

 
Rubbish, the lady was knocked into the river by the car for starters. Also most people get out the way of things coming towards automatically without terror, its called instinct and self preservation, you dont have time to think just react, been there done that in Thailand rather than be crushed by a car mounting a pavement in Ranong, no terror just reacted.
 
Remember there was no attack like a bomb etc it was just a car on the pavement rather than the road until it was over  with, it all happened in 82 seconds, its really nothing more than a bad auto accident can be,  the scumbag driver was dead within moments, mostly  people on scene immediately tried to help, thats courage not terror... 
 
The idea people are "terrified" is 99%  BS propaganda served up by our media and the BBC etc. I know there is indeed an element of mugs that take all the BS in and suitably pretend top be scared but that is how some of the brainwashed public act when all the media is ramming it down peoples throats 
 
London is especially used to attacks throughout the past 40 years thanks to the IRA and later  Islamic attacks. 
 
The only ones terrified will be the snowflakes, middle class women and the media encouraging fear and does no one any favours. There is plenty to be disgusted and angry about but little to be scared of in the UK and overwhelmingly most people are the former rather than latter... dont believe the BS the media tells you.
 
Now if I lived in Mosul et al then there might be more call to use the word scared but again terrified would still be too strong a word,  when an incident occurs yes it can induce terror and panic but nobody walks around terrified all day, its just not possible to get on with life in such a  state.

Hopkins is basically correct, we dont sweat this kind of thing too much and Londoners especially, the vast majority of British people arnt  wilting wallflowers the media would like to pretend or wish.I cant speak for the younger snowflakes these days who love to pretend drama and offence but thats a different topic.

Which is exactly what she did not say. She claims Brits are living in fear.

sent using Tapatalk

[Basil B]

5 hours ago, yogi100 said:

Of course the people were afraid. Why do you think one lady was so terrified she jumped off the bridge into the River Thames.

I am not sure she jumped... having witnessed a RTA where a young girl crossing the road at a zebra crossing was tossed in the air like a rag doll, and actually walked away from it I was thinking this woman may have been thrown over the bonnet of the car and over the parapet of the bridge.

 

Just googled this...

Quote

A woman who plunged into the Thames during Wednesday’s terror attack did not jump from Westminster Bridge to escape the attacker’s car, but was instead hurled into the water by the force of the vehicle, a senior diplomat has said.

Andreea Cristea, a 29-year-old Romanian architect, was spotted in the river soon after the attack. In the confusion that followed, there was speculation that Ms Cristea had leaped from the bridge to escape the violence.

But Romanian ambassador Dan Mihalache said Ms Cristea had been “practically thrown” into the river by the car.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/westminster-bridge-woman-fall-thames-river-london-terror-attack-car-pavement-hospital-a7647921.html

 

I have been trying to find out how Andreea Cristea is but there has been no news for a week now, last statement said:  "is in critical but stable condition"

 

Do hope she pulls through.